'mm 
it 


lisp-.. 


Iff 


^ 


ri,  .y:^,o  .  'o/^ 


#*^ 


^X  XU  ^htoh^ic^i  ^ 


% 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


'% 


% 


Purchased   by  the 
Mrs.   Robert   Lenox   Kennedy  Church   History   Fund. 


BR  162  .W67  1881  v. 2 
Wordsworth,  Christopher, 

1807-1885. 
A  church  history 


A 

CHURCH    HISTORY 

BY 

CHR.  WORDSWORTH,  D.D. 

BISHOP   OF    LINCOLN 
FROM   THE 

COUNCIL  OF  NIC^A,  a.d.  325 

TO   THE 

COUNCIL   OF    CONSTANTINOPLE,  a.d.  sSi 


Lately  published,  price  %s.  dd.      Third  Edition. 

A   CHURCH    HISTORY 

TO  THE  COUNCIL  OF  NIC^EA,  a.d.  325. 
By  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln. 


THE     HOLY     BIBLE, 

With  Introductions  and  Notes  by 
CHRISTOPHER  WORDSWORTH,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Lincoln 

New  and  Revised  Edition. 


THE   OLD   TESTAMENT, 

In  the  Authorized  Version,  with  Introductions,  Notes,  and  Index. 


In  Parts. 

In  Votumes. 

'ART 

I  s. 

d. 

VOL 

£ 

s.d. 

I.  Genesis  and  Exodus      . 

0  14 

0 

I. 

The  Pentateuch 

I 

5    0 

II.  Leviticus,        Numbers, 

Deuteronomy     . 

0  12 

0 

IL 

Joshua  to  Samuel    . 

0 

15     0 

III.  Joshua,  Judges,  Ruth  . 

0     9 

0 

IV.  Books  of  Samuel    . 

0     7 

0 

III. 

Kings  to  Esther 

0 

15    0 

V.  Kings,  Chronicles,  Ezra, 

Nehemiah,  Esther     . 

0  15 

0 

IV. 

Job  to  Song  of  Solomon 

I 

5     0 

VI.   Book  of  Job  . 

0     7 

0 

Vll.  Psalms  .         .         .         . 

0  II 

0 

V. 

Isaiah  to  Ezekiel 

I 

5     0 

VI 1 1.  Proverbs,    Ecclesiastes, 

Song  of  Solomon 

0     9 

0 

VI. 

Daniel,   Minor   Prophets, 

IX.  Isaiah     .         .         .         . 

0  10 

0 

and  Index     . 

0 

15     0 

X.  Jeremiah,         Lamenta- 

tions, Ezekiel    . 

0  16 

0 

XI.  Daniel    .         .         .         . 

0     5 

0 

XII.  Minor  Prophets 

0    9 

0 

Index 

0     2 

0 

£^    6 

0 

£6 

0    c 

THE    GREEK    TESTAMENT, 

With  Introductions,  Notes,  and  Index. 

In  Volumes. 
VOL.  £   s.  d. 

1.   Gospels   and  Acts  of  the 

Apostles        .         .         .130 

II.  Epistles,  ApocalyTJse,  and 

Index    .         .         .         .     r  17     o 


In  Parts. 
I'ART                                                               £ 
1.   Gospels    ....     0 
II.   Acts  of  the  Apostles         .     o 

III.  St.  Paul's  Epistles   .         .     i 

IV.  General  Epistles,  Apoca- 

lypse, Index            .         .     0 

s.  d. 
16     0 
8     0 
3     0 

16     0 

£s 

3     0 

£z    o    o 


Any  Part  or  any  Volnnie  of  the  above  may  be  had  separately. 


RIVINGTONS,  WATERLOO  TLACE,  LONDON. 


CHURCH  HISTORY 


CHR.  WORDSWORTH,  D.D. 

BISHOP  OF  LINCOLN 


VOL.    II. 

CONTAINING  THE 

HISTORY  FROM  THE  COUNCIL  OF  NIC^A  TO 
THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE 


SECOND  EDITION 


RIVINGTONS 
WATERLOO   PLACE,  LONDON 

MDCCCLXXXIII 

[All  rights  reserved, ~\ 


LONDON  : 
GILBERT   AND   RIVINGTON,    LIMITED, 
ST.    JOHN'S   SQUARE. 


ADVERTISEMENT. 


The  first  Volume,  already  published,  of  this  work, 
contains  the  period  of  Church  History  from  the  Day 
of  Pentecost  to  the  Council  of  Nicaea,  A.D.  325. 

The  present  Volume  contains  the  History  from 
the  Council  of  Nicaea  to  the  Council  of  Constanti- 
nople, A.D.  381. 

The  third  Volume  (if  it  pleases  God  to  enable 
the  Author  to  write  it)  will  bring  the  History  down 
to  the  Fourth  General  Council— the  Council  of 
Chalcedon — A.D.  451,  and  will  complete  the  Work. 

The  Index  to  the  Second  and  Third  Volumes 
will  follow  at  the  end  of  the  Third  Volume. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

INTRODUCTORY. 

On  the  period  of  Chiirch  History  betivcen  the  Council  of  Niccta,  A.D.  325, 
and  the  Council  of  Constantinople,  A.D.  381. 

PAGE 

The  year  1881,  just  elapsed,  the  fifteenth  centenary  from  the 
Council  of  Constantinople,  in  which  the  Creed  was  completed 
and  promulgated   which  is   now   received  by   the   Catholic 

Church ^ 

Review  of  the  past— Bright  prospects  of  the  Church  at  Nicsea, 

^_D_  325— Anticipations  at  that  time— Constantine,  Emperor       i 

The  united  Episcopate ^ 

But  Prophecy  predicted  a  continual  struggle  between  the   Church 

and  World— The  life  of  the  Church  on  earth  a  time  of  trial    .       2 

In  the  Ante-Nicene  Age  the  struggle  was  of  the  World  against  the 
Church ;  in  the  Post-Nicene  Age  it  was  the  struggle  of  the 
World  in  the  Church 3 

S.  Jerome's  saying— Constan tine's  character  and  poHcy  with  regard 
to  Arianism  and  Athanasius— Imperial  influence  on  the  Church 
under  his  son  and  successor,  Constantius— Effects  of  the  transfer 
of  the  seat  of  Empire  from  Rome  to  Constantinople         .         •       4 

Court  influence— Power  of  the  Chamberlains 

Influence  of  Arian  Women  in  high  places      .... 

Necessity  and  difficulty  of  contending  for  the  Homoousion      . 

What  would  have  been  the  consequence,  if  Athanasius  had 
succumbed  ?  ........ 

Apollinarianism  and  Macedonianism  consequent  on  Arianism 

Consequences  of  want  of  sacramental  grace  .... 

Contrast  in  Theodosius 

Preaching — its  power  and  character 12—14 


VIU 


Contents. 


Temptations — and  triumphs 
Prevalent  Schisms     . 
Frailties  of  some  orthodox  teachers 
Lapse  of  others — Hosius,  Liberius 
Shipwreck  of  the  faith  at  Ariminum 
Apostasy  of  Julian 
Persecution  under  Valens 
Death  of  Athanasius 
Ecclesiastical  Miracles 
Episcopate  of  Athanasius 
His  theology — Its  fmits    . 
His  character  .... 
His  banishments  ;  their  providential 
Athanasius  as  an  historian 
Athanasius  the  Teacher  of  the  West 
Quiet  teachings  in  troubled  times 
Partial  orthodoxy  in  some  who  were 
Inferences  from  Episcopal  failures 
Roman  fallibility 
Presbyterian  parity   . 
Sources  of  strength  in  Athanasius 
Practical  lessons  for  the  latter  days 


as  well  as 
heterodox 


of  the 


East 


14, 

15 

16 

16 

.17 

17- 

-19 

19- 

-21 

22 

23 

23 

24 

24- 

-28 

28 

29- 

-32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

38 

39 

39 

40 

41 

CHAPTER  II. 

From  the  Council  of  Niccea,  A.D.  325,  and  the  consecration  of  Athanasius , 
to  the  death  of  the  E?7iperor  Constantine^  May  22,  a.  d.  337. 


Consecration  of  Athanasius 

Missionary  work—  Abyssinia — Frumentius 

The  Goths— Ulphilas 

Palestine — Persia     . 

Manuscripts  of  the  Holy  Scriptures 

New  Churches 

Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre 

Helena  the  Mother  of  Constantine 

"  Invention  of  the  Cross  " — Mount  of  Olives— Bethlehem 

Constantine  recalls  Anus  and  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia 

Athanasius  refuses  to  receive  Arius  to  communion 

Charges  against  Athanasius — Ischyras 

Refutation  of 

Eustathius,  Bishop  of  Antioch,  unjustly  condemned   . 


42 
43 
43 
44 
44,45 
45 
46 
46-48 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 


Contents. 


IX 


His  Arian  successors 

Other  charges  against  Athanasius — Arsenius     . 

Council  of  Tyre— Potammon's  reproof  of  Eusebius  of  Caesarea 

Accusations  against  Athanasius 

Refutation  of 

Athanasius  condemned  and  deposed— appeals  to  Constantine 

Dedication  of  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre 

Arius  is  received  to  Communion  by  Bishops  at  Jerusalem  . 

Athanasius  at  Constantinople  ;  interview  with  Constantine 

Athanasius  is  banished  to  Treves 

Arius  is  invited  to  Constantinople      . 

His  profession  of  faith  accepted  by  Constantine 

Alexander  Bishop  of  Constantinople— his  prayer 

Death  of  Arius         ...... 

Sickness  of  Constantine— Baptism  and  death     . 


54 
54 
55 
56 
57 
59 
59 
6o 
6i 

62 

63 
64 

64,65 

65 
67 


CHAPTER  in. 

From  the  accession  of  the  three  so7ts  of  Constantine  {Constantine  II.., 
Constantius,  and  Constans),  A.D.  337,  to  the  death  of  Constans, 
A.D.  350,  when  Constantius  became  sole  Emperor. 

Partition  of  the  Empire 68 

Bloodshed  of  their  kindred  at  the  accession  of  the  sons  of  Con- 
stantine    .....         .....  69 

Callus  and  Julian  preserved 69 

Athanasius  restored  by  Constantine  II.      .         .         .         .         •  7° 

His  interviews  with  Constantius 7 1 

Fresh  charges  against  him 7 1 

Eusebius,  Bishop  of  Nicomedia,  translated  to  Constantinople     .  72 
Death  and  character  of  Eusebius  the  Church  Historian      .         .   73,  74 

Death  of  Constantine  II. 74 

Gregory    of    Cappadocia     sent     by    Constantius    to    displace 

Athanasius         ......•••  75 

Outrages  at  Alexandria 76 

Athanasius  at  Rome 77 

Rise  of  Monastic  spirit  in  the  West 77 

Athanasius  supported  by  Constans,  and  by  Julius  Bishop  of  Rome  78 

Dedication  of  Church  at  Antioch 79 

Council  at  Antioch 79 

Various  Creeds  of  the  Council 80 

Canons  of  the  Council  of  Antioch      .         .         .         .         .         .  8 1 


X  Contents. 

PAGE 

Chorepiscopi    ..........         82 

On  Appeals  of  Bishops  ;  on  Consecrations  ;  on  Translations       .   82,  83 
Death  of  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia       ......         83 

Hopes  of  peace  ;  destroyed  by  the  temporal  power  ...  84 
Correspondence  between   the   Council   of  Antioch  and   Julius 

Bishop  of  Rome         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .  85, 87 

Judgment  of  Julius  on  the  Synod  of  Tyre  .  .         .  .85,86 

Remonstrance  against  the  Council  at  Antioch    .         .  .         .   06,  87 

Appeal  to  Constans  ........         87 

Letter  of  Athanasius  to  Constantius 88 

The  Westerns  maintain  the  Nicene  Creed  .         .         .         .   89,  90 

^\i&  Macrostich 89 

Council  of  Sardica    .........         89 

Pronounces     in    favour     of    Athanasius,    and    condemns     his 

accusers     .......  ...         91 

On  Appeals  to  Julius  Bishop  of  Rome 92 

Canons  of  Sardica 94^  95 

The  Donatists 96 

Council  of  Carthage 96 

The  Eastern  Arians  at  Philippopolis—Arian  reprisals  .  .  98 
The  East  divided  against  the  West,  and  against  itself  .         .         99 

Plot  against  Vincentius  and  Euphratas  at  Antioch      .  .         .        100 

Temporary  change  in  the  conduct  of  Constantius  to  Athanasius  loi,  102 
Death  of  Gregory  the  usurping  Bishop  of  Alexandria  .  .        loi 

Letter  of  Julius   to   the    Church   at   Alexandria   in    favour    of 

Athanasius         .         .  .......        102 

Letters  of  Constantius  in  his  favour 104,105 

His  triumphant  return  to  Alexandria         .         .         .  .       105 — loS 

His  enemies  Ursacius  and  Valens  recant    .         .         .  .  .107 

Three  years'  peace 109 

Death  of  Constans .         .        no 


CHAPTER  IV. 

From  the  death  of  Constans,  A.  D,  350,   when   Constantius  became  sole 
Emperor,  to  the  death  of  Constantius,  Nov.  3,  A.D.  361. 

Character  of  Constantius in 

Friendly  letters  to  Athanasius 1 12 

Victory  of  Constantius  over  the  Persians  at  Nisibis     .         .         .  113 

Exhorts  his  soldiers  to  be  baptized 113 

His  successes  against  rebels 113 


Contents. 


XI 


Constantius  at  Sirmium    ....... 

Arian  Council  there  ....... 

Photinus  deposed      .         . 

Victory  of  Constantius  at  Mursa  over  the  usurper  Magnentius 
Valens  Arian  Bishop  of  Mursa — his  influence  with  Constantius 
"Luminous  Cross  at  Jerusalem  "      .... 

Writings  of  Athanasius     ...... 

Death  of  Julius  Bishop  of  Rome  ;  succeeded  by  Liberius 

Fresh  charge  against  Athanasius  ;  using  a  Church  not  consecrated 

Constantius  at  Aries  ..... 

Lapse  of  Vincent  of  Capua — comment  of  Liberius 

Constantius  at  Milan 

Arian  Council  there 

Creed  put  forth  by  them   ..... 

Lucifer    of    Cagliari  —  remonstrates    against    Constantius 
banished   ....... 

S.  Hilary  of  Poictiers — his  exile 

Constantius  assails  Liberius       .... 

Noble  resistance  of  Liberius      .... 

Banished  to  Thrace  ..... 

Constantius  assails  Hosius  ;  his  courageous  answer 
Banished  to  Sirmium        ..... 

Constantius  attacks  Athanasius 

Outrages  at  Alexandria — His  conduct  there 

He  retires  into  the  desert  .... 

George  of  Cappadocia  is  intruded  into  his  see  . 

"  Apologia  "  of  Athanasius  to  Constantius 

His  writings  in  retirement 

Arian  formulas  of  belief  at  Sirmium  . 

Fall  of  Hosius  Bishop  of  Corduba     . 

Fall  of  Liberius  Bishop  of  Rome 

Tenderness  of  Athanasius 

S.  Hilary — Phoebadius — S.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem 

Apollinarians  and  Macedonians  produced  by  Arianism 

Semi-Arians — Basilius  of  Ancyra 

Vacillation  of  Constantius 

"The  dated  Creed" 

Council  of  Ariminum ;  at  first  orthodox 

Its  deputies  overreached  by  Arians 

The  Bishops  at  Ariminum  yield — Arianism  triumphant 

Meletius  at  Antioch  ..... 

Julian  marches  from  Paris  against  Constantius  . 


28, 


31, 


XII 


Co?itents. 


Sickness,  baptism,  and  death  of  Constantius 

Review  of  his  reign 

Evil  overruled  for  good     ..... 
Good  mingled  with  evil    ..... 
Missions  to  heathen — Georgia — Persia— A lalVia 
S.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  on  the  effects  of  the  Gospel 
On  strifes  and  errors  of  Christians 
Julian  arrives  at  Constantinople 


CHAPTER  V. 


istianity 


From  the  accession  of  Julian^  A.D.  361,  to  his  deaths  A.D.  363. 


Remarkable  circumstances  at  the  accession  of  Julian 

Disadvantages  of  his  younger  life 

Early  influences  and  sudden  elevation 

His  wife  Helena,  sister  of  Constantius 

Special  interest  of  his  reign       .... 

Examples  of  retributive  justice  executed  by  his  means 

Circumstances  favourable  to  Heathenism — internal  strifes  of  the 

Church 

Julian's  special  qualification  for  a  warfare  against  Ch: 

His  intellectual  gifts  and  attainments 

His  moral  qualities  and  habits  . 

His  enthusiastic  love  of  Paganism 

His  mysticism  ..... 

His  apostasy    ...... 

Personal  appearance  .... 

Views  of  his  own  Imperial  mission    . 

Aided  by  Powers  of  darkness    . 

Belief  in  oracles ;  and  divination 

Parallel  between  Julian  and  Antiochus  Epiphai 

His  policy  for  the  overthrow  of  Christianity 

Toleration 

Recall  of  Bishops      ..... 
Edicts  against  Christian  Professors    . 
Popular  outbreaks  against  Christianity 
Allurements  to  idolatry     .... 
Pauperization  of  Clergy     .... 
Julian's  attempts  to  popularize  and  moralize  Paganis 
Overruled  for  good 


55. 


59, 


Contents. 


Xlll 


zland 


Antioch- 


Noble  examples  of  Christian  Confessors — Romanus,  Caesarius, 

F.  M.  Victorinus        ..... 
Remarkable  conversion  and  confession  of  Victorinus 
Christian  Poetry  due  to  Julian's  aggressions 
His  writings  against  Christianity 
Their  witness  to  the  faith  professed  by  the  Church 
Martyrdom  of  Mark  of  Arethusa 
George  of  Cappadocia — is  he  the  "  S.  George  of  En 
Council  of  Alexandria  under  Athanasius    . 
Its  wise  decrees  as  to  the  *'/a/^^"    . 
Rigour  of  Lucifer  of  Cagliari — consequent  schism  at 

'  *  Luciferians  "  ...... 

Hypostasis  sometimes  used  as  equivalent  to  Persona 

Julian's  persecution  of  Athanasius     . 

"  This  cloud  will  soon  pass  by  " 

Julian's  attempt  to  rebuild  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem — reasons  for 

A  direct  antagonism  to  Christ  .... 

Preparations  for  the  work — ^Jewish  co-operation  in 

of  and  results    ...... 

Christian  testimonies         ..... 

Ammianus  and  Gibbon  upon  it  .  .  . 

Warburton's  Julian  ...... 

The  end  was  near    .         .         .         .         ... 

Campaign  in  Persia  .  .  .         .  .         .         .         176, 


Favourable  responses  of  heathen  oracles— 

ts  site,  note)     .... 
Christian  predictions         .         .         . 
Julian's  victory — confidence  and  temerity 
His  forebodings  ;  defeat  and  death-bed 
Review  of  his  character  and  acts 
Solution  of  the  enigma 
"Thou  hast  conquered,  O  Galilaean  !  " 


.       164 

64 — 166 

.        167 

.       167 

168 

169 

.        169 

169 

.        170 


Delphi,  Delos,  Dodona 


170 
170 
171 
171 
172 
.  172 
progress 

•  172-174 
.        172 

•  174—176 
.         .       176 

176 
177 

177 
177 
178 
179 
-182 
183 
185 


[80- 


CHAPTER  VI. 


From  the  accession  of  Jovian,  a.d.    363,  to  the  death  of  Athanasius^ 
A.D.  373. 

Inferences  from  Julian's  reign    .         .         .         .         ,         .         .186 
Electionof  Jovian— His  avowal  of  Christianity  .         .        187,188 

Julian's  burial  at  Tarsus  .......        188 


Contents. 


Jovian's  piety  and  modesty — Ancient  Inscription  at  Corfu  {note) 

— his  letter  to  Athanasius 1S9 

Reply  of  Athanasius    and  his    Synod   to   Jovian   on   the  true 

faith I90»  192 

Disruption  of  Arianism 193 

Inferences  from         .         . 193,  194 

Jovian's  reply  to  Arians    .         .  .         .         .         .         .         .194 

His  character  and  death I95>  196 

Council  of  Laodicea — its  date    .......        196 

Its  Canons — on  Ordination  ;  Chorepiscopi  ;  divine  worship  and 
ritual  ;  fasting  ;  baptism  ;  reception  of  heretics  ;  on  resort 
to  heretical  places  of  worship  ;  on  worship  of  Angels ; 
on  sorcery;  on  Psalmody;  on  the  "Canon  of  Scrip- 
ture"          197—200 

On  the  principles  which  guided  the  Church  in  the  formation  of 
the  Canon— 

(i)  Of  the  (9/^  Testament  ....       201—203 

(2)  Of  the  New  Testament 204 

On  the  "Apocrypha"  and  on  "  Ecclesiastical  Books"      .         .       203 
Amphilochius  Bishop  of  Iconium       .         .  ....       203 

Conjectural  emendations  of  his  verses  to  Seleucus  {iiote)     .         .       203 
On  what  basis  the  "  Canon  of  Scripture"  rests  .         .         .       205 

Wisdom  of  the  Church  of  England  in  this  matter       .  .         .       205 

Valentinian  chosen  Emperor .       205 

Appoints  his  brother  Valens  to  be  Emperor  of  the  West    .  .       205 

Their  different  religious  belief  and  procedure     ....       2o5 
Auxentius,  Bishop  of  Milan,  acquitted        .....       207 

Protest  of  S.  Hilary 208 

S.  Hilary  on  secular  usurpations  in  spiritual  matters  .         .         .       209 

S.  Hilary  against  Arianism 210 

On  Church  and  State        ........       210 

Remarks  on  his  character  and  writings      .         .  .         .  .211 

Benefits  derived  by  the  Church  from  some  secular  Powers  and 

Acts 212 

Valentinian  and  S.  Ambrose     .         .         .         .         .         .         .212 

Semi-Arian  Coimcils         .         .         .         .  .         .  .         .213 

Prosecution  of  Magicians  .......        213 

Divination  concerning  Valens — Theod — death  by  fire        .  .       214 

Semi-Arian  Appeal  to  the  West        .         .         .         .         .         .214 

Approximation  of  Semi- Arians  to  Homoousians         .  .         .214 

Recovery  and  Reply  of  Liberius        ,         .         .         .         .  .215 

Death  of  Liberius — Contebted  election  01  Damasus    .         .         .       216 


Contents.  xv 

PAGE 

Luxury  and  avarice  at  Rome 216,  217 

Character  of  Damasus       .         . 217 

Occupations  of  Athanasius— his  writings 218 

Important  declaration  on  the  "  Canon  of  Scripture  "  .        219,  220 

The  Trent  Canon  of  Scripture  contrasted  with  that  of  Athanasius  220 
Athanasius,   by   anticipation,    condemns    Apollinarianism    and 

Nestorianism     .........       221 

Ordination  of  Siderius 222 

Conciliatory  judgment  of  Athanasius  on  the  words  '■'■  Person'''' 

and  **  Hypostasis  " 222 

His  firmness  and  charity 223 

S.  Basil's  letters  to  S.  Athanasius 224,  225 

Death  of  Athanasius— in  what  respect  opportune        .         .        225,226 

Men  pass  away ;  the  Faith  remains 226 

The  sacred  Lampadephoria 227 


CHAPTER  VII. 

from  the  accessidn  of  the  Emperor  Valejts  and  the  Ordination  of  S.Basil, 
A.D.  364,  to  the  death  of  Valens,  Aug.  9,  378,  and  to  the  death  of 
S.  Basil,  Ja7i.  I,  379. 

Chronological  coincidences  between  Valens  and  S.  Basil    .         .       229 
Difference  between   the    two   persecutions    respectively  under 

the  two  Emperors  Constantius  and  Valens           .         .         229,  230 
Providential  purposes   answered   under   persecutions    by   Con- 
stantius, Julian,  and  Valens         230,231 

Character  of  Valens — reign  of  terror 230 

Persecution  general 231 

Eighty  presbyters  burnt 232 

Attempts  against  Basil 233 

His  birth,  parentage,  and  early  history       ....        233,  234 

Coenobia 234,235 

Gregory  Nazianzen  on 234,  235 

Basil's  ordination 236 

His  connexion  with  Eusebius  Bishop  of  Csesarea  in  Cappadocia        237 

Basil's  works  of  charity 237 

His  Liturgy 237,  278,  282 

His  election  to  the  See  of  Caesarea 239 

Gregory  Bishop  of  Nazianzus,  the  father 239 

Territorial  divisions  of  Roman  Empire  preadjusted  to  those  of  the 

Church 240 


xvi  Contents. 

PACa 

I.  Dioecesis  ;  2.  Province  ;  3.  Diocese 241 

Exarchate  of  Caesarea 241 

Basil's  difficulties  and  adversaries — Eustathius  of  Sebaste  .        242,  243 

Council  of  Gangra  against  Eustathians 243 

Canons  on  asceticism 243 

On  Married  Priests  .........       244 

On  temperance  and  chastity  .  .  .  ,  .  .  .  244 
Basil  on  "Marriage  with  a  deceased  "Wife's  sister"    .         .        245,  262 

On  the  divinity  of  the  Holy  Ghost 246 

Gregory  of  Nyssa,  Basil's  brother 247 

Basil's   letters  of  entreaty  and  remonstrance  to  Damasus  Bishop 

of  Rome  .         .  .......       247 

His    description    of  the   state   of  the    Eastern   Church    under 

Valens 247,  248 

His  complaint  of  the  pride  of  Damasus 249 

Moral  condition  of  Rome  .......       249 

S.  Jerome  on  the  pride  of  Basil 250 

S.  Basil's  comfort  from  Milan  and  S.  Ambrose  .         .        250,  251 

On   the   doxology  sometimes    used  by   S.  Basil,    and   on   the 

Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghost 252 

Valens  sends  the  Prefect  Modestus  to  arraign  Basil    .         .         .       253 

Their  dialogue  . 253—255 

Report  of  Modestus  to  Valens  ......       255 

The  Emperor  Valens  in  the  Cathedral  Church  of  Caesarea  .       255 

The  Bishop's  place,  as  Celebrant,  in  the  Church         .         .        255,  256 
Basil's  Asylum  and  Hospital     .......       256 

Ruins  near  Caesarea .         ........       257 

State  of  the  Church  of  Alexandria 258 

Banishment  of  Bishops     .......        258,  263 

Eusebius  of  Samosata  .  ......        258,  259 

Basil's  *' Canonical  Epistles  "  .......       259 

On  Baptism,  Marriage,  Divorce,  Marriage  with  wife's  sister,  Vows 

of  abstinence      ........        259,  260 

On  frequent  Communion .         .         .         .         .         .         ,         .261 

Gregory  Nyssen  on  Pilgrimages  to  the  Holy  Land     .         .        261,  262 

His  banishment 263 

S.  Epiphanius  to  S.  Basil  on  the  Schism  at  Antioch  .         .       263 

AVhat  addition  was  needed  to  the  Nicene  Creed  .         .         .       263 

On  hypostasis  and  person .264 

Basil's  sympathy  with  secular  studies  .....  265 
His  view  of  classical  Authors  and  their  writings  .  .  265,  266 
His  book  '*  on  reading  the  works  of  the  Gentiles  "     .         .         265,  269 


Contents.  xvii 

PAGE 

Homer,  Hesiod,  &c 267 

On  heathen   Examples :    Pericles,    Euclid,    Alexander,    Milo, 

Timotheus 268 

Gregory  Nazianzen  on  Basil's  works ......       269 

The  Goths  used  as  Instruments  of  Divine  Providence         .         ,       270 

Ulphilas .       270 

Goths,  flying  from  the  Huns,  appeal  to  Valens  .  .  .  .271 
His  impolitic  negotiations  with  them  .  .  .  .  .271 
.  Their  revolt  and  invasion  ......        271,  272 

Battle  of  Adrianople 272,273 

Death  of  Valens       .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         ,       27  ^ 

Oracular  prognostications— Conjectural  emendations  of  a  pas- 
sage in  Ammianus  Marcelliuus    .....        273,  274 

Retribution      .         .         .         .     ,    .         .         .         .         .        273, 274 

Theodosius  preserved        ........       274. 

Last  days  of  S.  Basil  at  Caesarea 275 

His  death 276 


CHAPTER  Vni. 

Divine  Worship  in  the  Church — Ancieyif  Liturgies — Effects  p7-oduced  on 
Ch-istian  Life — Marriage  and  Celibacy — Elevation  of  Woniaiihood 
— Its  infueiue. 

Quiet  influence  of  the  spiritual  life  of  the  Church  in  evil  times    .       277 

Use  of  a  Scriptural  and  Catholic  Liturgy 277 

Primitive  Liturgies  not  committed  to  writing  ....  278 
S.  Chrysostom's  Liturgy  derived  from  S.  Basil's  .  .  .  278 
S.  Justin  Martyr  on  the  primitive  Liturgy  ....       279 

Order  and  substance  of  Divine  Service        ....       279,  280 

Clementine  Liturgy 279 — 281 

Ancient  Liturgies  substantially  the  same,  with  circumstantial 

varieties 281, 282 

S.  Basil's  Liturgy 2S2 

Probably  derived  in  part  from  that  of  St.  James  of  Jerusalem  .  283 
Liturgy  of  Jerusalem  as  described  by  S.  Cyril     .         .         .        283,  284 

Cyril's  Sacramental  Lectures 283,  2S4 

On  the  Ritual  of  Holy  Baptism 284,  285 

On  the  Ritual  of  Holy  Communion 285—288 

On  prayers  for  the  faithful  departed    ....        279,  286,  2S7 

VOL.  n.  a 


xviii  Contents, 

PAGE 

On  the  moral  and  social  effects  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Incarna- 
tion ;  and  on  itb  blessings  conveyed  by  the  working  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  in  Baptism,  Prayer,  Holy  Scripture,  and 
Holy  Communion        ........       288 

Christian  Life — social  and  domestic 289 

Consecration  of  Womanhood      .......       289 

Marriage  and  Celibacy        ........       289 

Doctrine  of  Holy  Scripture  and  the  Church  on  jNIarriage  and 

Celibacy  of  the  Clergy  ......       289,  290 

Relations  of  Women  to  the  Church 291 

Influence  of  Arianism  on  Womanhood 292 

And  of  Catholicism — Female  sympathy 292 

Examples  of  the  great   early   Teachers   of  the   Church  j  their 

relation  to  Womanhood      .         •        .        .        .        .      292  —294 


CHAPTER  IX. 

From  the  accession  of  Theodoshis  the  Great,  Emperor  of  the  East, 
Jan.  19,  A.D.  379,  to  the  Council  of  Constantinople,  May  to 
'July  9,  A.D.  381. 

Condition  of  the  Empire  on  the  death  of  Valens          .         .        .  295 
Gratian  associates  with  himself  Theodosius,  to  be  Empei'or  of 

the  East 295 

Religious  distress  of  Constantinople — Arians  and  Semi-Arians 

or  Macedonians  .         ........  296 

Who  will  be  able  to  relieve  it  ? 297 

Gregory  of  Nazianzus          ........  297 

His  history — eloquence — learning — sympathy     ....  298 

His  mother 298 

His  funeral  orations  on  his  sister,  brother,  and  father  .        299,  300 

On  the  state  of  the  soul  after  death 299 

His  father's  church  at  Nazianzus— on  ancient  churches        .         .  300 
Sets  out  for  Constantinople — His  prayer  and  vow       .         .       300,  301 
His  church  at  Constantinople— Anastasia  ....        301,  302 
His  Sermons — on  Peace ;  on  theological  speculation  and  con- 
troversy         303 

On  theological  talk — Need  of  work 304 

Gregory  on  the  evidences  of  God  in  Nature — and  revelations  in 

Scripture 305 

On  the  Divinity  of  the  Son  ;  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost  .        .        .  305 


Contefits. 


XIX 


PAGE 

Oil  the  two  Natures,  and  one  Person,  of  Christ  ....       306 

On  Baptism 306 

On  the  Godhead  and  PersonaHty  of  the  Holy  Ghost  .         .         .       307 
Successive  revelations  of  the  Divine  Persons  in  Scripture    .         .       307 

Gregory '' the  Theologian'' 308 

The  Church  holds  the  mean  between  Sabellianism  and  Arianism       309 

Gregory  on  the  Maccabees 3^9 

Festival  of  the  Maccabees 3^9 

Gregory  on  Athanasius 3*° 

On  Cyprian 310 

S.  Jerome  a  scholar  of  Gregory  at  Constantinople       .         .         .       310 

Gregory's  troubles 310,311 

Undermined  by  Maximus 31 1 

Consecration  of  Maximus  at  Constantinople         .         .         .         .312 

Theodosius  baptized  by  Ascholius 312 

313 
313 
313 
314 
314 
315 


Laws  of  Theodosius  on  Religion 

He  repels  Maximus     .         . 

Consults  Damasus 

He  convenes  the  Council  of  Constantinople         .... 
He  commits  the  Church  at  Constantinople  to  the  care  of  Gregory 
Gregory,  with  the  Emperor,  in  the  Church  of  S.  Sophia     . 
Gregory's  Sermon  to  Theodosius,  the  nobility,  philosophers,  and 

people  of  Constantinople 3I5>  3^^ 

His  Episcopal  reforms  and  generosity 316 

His  Sermon  on  the  Incarnation,  at  Christmas  ;  on  Baptism  of 

young  children  ;  on  delay  of  Baptism  .... 

Ecclesiastical  Legislation  of  Theodosius 

Warnings  from  the  history  of  the  Priscillianists  against  Appeals 

from    the    Spiritualty   to    the    Secular  Power  for  coercive 

measures  in  matters  of  religion 317,318 

Preparations  for  the  Council  of  Constantinople   . 

Damasus  on  Apollinarianism 

On  the  Macedonian  heresy  ..... 

Interview  of  the  Bishops  with  Theodosius 

He  recognizes  Meletius  Bishop  of  Antioch 

Special  characteristics  of  the  Council  of  Constantinople 

Its  members 

The  Macedonians 

Its  Synodical  acts  :  it  annuls  the  ordination  of  Maximus  ; 

firms  the  election  of  Gregory  as  Bishop  of  Constantinople    .       324 

Attempts  to  heal  the  Schism  at  Antioch 324 

Death  of  Meletius — prospec   of  peace — Gregory's  wise  counsels  .       325 


317 
317 


319 
320 

321 

322 
322 
323 
323 
323 


XX  Contents, 

PAGE 

The  '*  younger    Bishops "   oppose    Gregory — the  election    of 

Flavian  to  the  See  of  Antioch 326 

Unjust  allegations  against  Gregory 327 

He  resigns  his  see 328 

His  farewell  oration  in  the  Church  of  S.  Sophia          .         ,         .  329 

His  retirement 330 

The  Election  of  Nectarius  to  the  See  of  Constantinople       .         .  331 
Acts  of  the  Council — Secession   of  the  Macedonians  from  the 

Council 331 

Dogmatic  decrees  of  the  Council 332 

The  Niceno-Constantinopolitan  Creed  ;  the  Creed  of  the  Uni- 
versal Church  for  1500  years 333 

On  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost — ^how  the  Greek  and  Latin 

Churches  are  to  be  reconciled  as  to  \\\q  filmjiie    .         .      334 — 336 

Canons  of  the  Council  of  Constantinople 337 

Dignity  of  the  See  of  Constantinople 338 

Canon  against  Maximus 338 

Canon  on  Appeals 339 

No  Western  Bishop  prese      a   the  Council  of  Constantinople      .  339 
Letters   of  the  Council  to      heodosius  ;   and  to  the   Western 

Bishops       .         .                  340 

On  the  ordination  of  Necta  rius  ;  and  Flavian  ;  and  restoration 

of  S.  Cyril  to  Jerusalem,  "  the  mother  of  all  Churches  "       .  341 

Why  the  Council  of  Constantinople  is  called  a  General  Council  342 
The  Constantinopolitan  Creed  has  been  received  and  maintained 

in  Christendom  for  1500  years  — and  cannot  now  be  shaken  342 

What  the  life  and  work  of  the  Church  Catholic  on  eartli  is          .  343 

What  Church  History  is 344 

Constantinople,  once  a  seat  of  heresy,  became  a  fortress  of  faith .  344 
Inferences  from  the  history  of  the  Church  between  the  Councils  of 

Nicsea  and  Constantinople 345 

God's  strength  perfected  in  man's  weakness         .         ,         .         .  346 

Prospects  of  the  future  ;  Signs  of  the  Latter  Days      .         .         .  347 

Conclusion 347 


CHAPTER  I. 

INTRODUCTORY. 

On  the  period  of  Church  History  between  the  CoJincil  of 
Niccea,  a.d.  325,  and  the  Conncil  of  Constantinople, 
A.D.  381. 

The  present  Volume  comprises  the  history  of  the 
Church  from  the  Council  of  Nicsea,  A.D.  325,  to  that 
of  Constantinople,  A.D.  381. 

The  year  1 881,  just  passed,  was  the  fifteen-hundredth 
from  the  Council  of  Constantinople,  in  which  the 
Creed  was  promulgated,  which  is  now  received  by  all 
Catholic  Churches.^ 

They  who  live  now  are  enabled  to  form  a  clearer 
judgment  on  men,  actions  and  events,  than  could 
have  been  pronounced  by  those  who  were  contem- 
porary with  them  ;  and  they  will  be  strengthened  in 
the  profession  of  the  Truth  by  observing  how  the  hos- 
tile attacks  against  it  were  overruled  by  the  Divine 
Head  of  the  Church  for  the  stronger  confirmation  and 
clearer  manifestation  of  the  Faith. 

When  the  Creed  of  Nicsea  was  put  forth  in  A.D. 
325,  it  might  have  been  anticipated  that  a  time  of 
peace  and  prosperity  had  dawned  upon  the  Church. 

1  With  the  addition  oit\iejilioque  in  the  Western  Church.  See  above, 
vol.  i.  of  the  present  work,  p.  453. 

VOL.   II.  ^ 


2         Prospects  at  Niccea — Study  of  post-Nice7ie  history. 

The  Emperor  of  the  Roman  world,  Constantlne,  had 
summoned  that  Council,  in  which  that  Creed  had 
been  published ;  and  after  its  adoption  he  had  com- 
mended it  to  general  acceptance  in  the  Roman 
Empire.  The  former  opponents  of  the  faith  had 
subscribed  it.  The  318  Bishops  who  had  met  at 
Nicsea  returned  to  their  dioceses  with  thankfulness 
and  joy,  and  after  a  stormy  voyage  of  more  than  300 
years  the  bark  of  Christ's  Church  seemed  to  be  at 
length  safely  anchored  in  a  harbour  of  peace. 

But  the  Divine  Founder  of  the  Church,  when  He 
declared  that  He  would  build  His  Church  on  a  Rock, 
had  also  said  that  the  gates  of  Hell  would  not  prevail 
against  it  (Matt.  xvi.  18),  and  He  had  implied  by  that 
saying  that  those  Powers  would  violently  attack  it, 
and  He  revealed  to  the  beloved  disciple,  St  John,  in 
the  Apocalypse,  that  the  Church  must  expect  to  be 
assailed  by  the  Evil  One  in  various  forms,  in  succes- 
sive ages,  to  the  complete  triumph  of  Her  Divine 
Lord  at  the  final  consummation  of  all  things.^ 

We  are  not,  therefore,  perplexed  by  the  sufferings 
of  the  Church  in  the  interval  between  Nicsea  and 
Constantinople,  which  in  some  respects  were  more 
severe  than  those  of  the  Ante-Nicene  age. 

I.  The  study  of  this  portion  of  Church  History,  if 
read  in  the  chronological  sequence  of  events,  may  be 
found  to  be  tedious  and  embarrassing ;  but  if  a  pre- 
paration is  made  for  that  study,  by  a  careful  conside- 
ration of  the  causes  which  produced  those  events,  it 
will  be  seen  to  be  full  of  interest  and  instruction. 

To  suggest  some  reflections  on  those  causes,  is  the 
design  of  the  present  chapter. 

2  See  on  Rev.  vi.  2 ;  vii.  7. 


The  World  in  the  Church — Court  influence.  3 

In  the  Ante-Nicene  age  the  World  had  been  arrayed 
against  the  Church  ;  but  in  the  next  period  the 
World  worked  iii  the  Church ;  and  it  caused  more 
injury  to  the  faith  than  when  arrayed  against  it.  As 
S.  Jerome  says,  "the  Church  under  sovereign  Princes 
was  greater  in  wealth  and  power,  but  she  was  less  in 
virtues."  ^  In  the  former  age  she  had  been  glorified 
by  a  noble  army  of  Martyrs  ;  in  the  latter  she  was 
distressed  by  many  time-serving  Prelates,  and  was 
betrayed  by  some  who  fell  from  the  faith,  and  either 
secretly  undermined  or  openly  impugned  it. 

2.  We  may  here  review  some  of  the  causes  and 
consequences  of  the  worldly  spirit  operating  in  the 
Church  and  upon  it. 

Constantine,  we  need  not  doubt,  was  zealous  for 
the  faith  to  which  he  attributed  his  victories.  But  he 
loved  peace  more  than  truth.  After  the  Council  of 
Nicaea  he  had  banished  Arius  and  his  friend  and 
patron  Eusebius,  Bishop  of  Nicomedia,  the  most 
powerful  partisan  of  Arianism.  But,  without  any  due 
evidence  of  their  amendment,  the  Emperor  restored 
and  encouraged  them  ;  and  he  abandoned,  persecuted, 
and  eventually  banished  on  false  accusations,  Athana- 
sius,  the  champion  of  the  Nicene  faith,  the  Bishop  of 
the  Church  of  Alexandria,  who  was  supported  by  the 
united  testimony  of  his  suffragans.  In  the  person  of 
Athanasius  the  Faith  was  sacrificed  by  the  Emperor 
of  the  world  to  secular  policy  and  to  a  desire  of 
peace. 

3.  Under  Constantine's  son  and  successor  in  the 
East_,  Constantius,  the  worldly  spirit  worked  with  still 
more  subtilty  and  energy  against  the  Church, 

3  '*  Ecclesia  sub  principibus,  divitiis  major,  virtutibus  minor." 
S.  Jerome  in  vita  Malchi,  torn,  iv.  p.  91,  ed.  Benedict.  1706. 

B   2 


4  Orientalism  at  Constantinople — the  Eunnchs 

Christianity  had  gained  much  by  the  transfer  of  the 
seat  of  Empire  from  Rome  to  Constantinople  by 
Constantine  in  A.D.  330.  The  Empire  had  migrated 
from  a  city  of  heathen  temples  to  a  capital  of  Christian 
Churches,  In  which  no  signs  of  idolatry  were  visible, 
except  m  a  vanquished  form.  The  spiritual  Enemy 
of  the  Church,  symbciized  oy  the  Dragon,^  was  dis- 
played there,  crushed  under  the  feet  of  Constantine, 
triumphing  by  the  power  of  the  Cross  ;  which  held  a 
conspicuous  place  in  the  stateliest  presence-chamber 
of  the  Imperial  Palace. 

But  oriental  effeminacy  was  more  unfavourable  to 
the  Church  than  Western  heathenism  had  been.  Espe- 
cially was  this  the  case  under  weak,  fickle,  and  there- 
fore— when  under  evil  influences — vindictive  and  san- 
guinary emperors,  such  as  Constantius  ^  and  Valens. 

4.  The  power  of  the  courtly  freedmen  at  Rome 
under  emperors  such  as  Nero  and  Claudius,  had  been 
the  scourge  of  their  subjects  ;  but  under  the  Eastern 
Empire,  where  no  hereditary  patricians  exercised  an 
independent  power,  and  all  civil  and  military  of^ces 
were  disposed  of  by  the  imperial  will,  there  arose  a 
class  of  ambitious  aspirants,  subtle  intriguers,  servile 
sycophants,  implacable  enemies,  whose  influence  was 
as  disastrous  to  the  Church  as  that  of  the  liberti,  or 
freedmen,  had  been  under  heathen  emperors  to  the 
State.  They  had  been  created  by  the  social  vices  of 
the  times,  and  they  were  potent  allies  of  the  World  in 
its  hostility  to  the  Church. 

These  were   the  Eunuchs — we  must  mention  their 

'*  Euseb.  Vita  Const,  iii.  348,  349  ;  iv,  15,  17. 

*  Ammianus  Marcellinus  does  not  scruple  to  compare  Constantius  to 
Nero,  Caligula,  and  Commodus,  xxi.  16,  ^^  quoriun  immanitatcm  facile 
siiperabat,^^ 


Female  influence  in  high  places.  5 

name.     The  contemporary    heathen  Historian  Am- 
mianus  Marcellinus  dilates  on  their  power  and  their 
profligacy ;   and    the    Christian    Bishop   Athanasius 
displays  them    as    inveterate   enemies   of  the   faith. 
Ammianus  says  somewhat  archly ,«  that  "  Constantius 
had  great  influence  with  his  chamberlain,  the  Eunuch 
Eusebius :"  as  if  the  minister  were  the  lord   of  his 
lord  ;  and  he  reveals  the  secret  of  this  influence  when 
he  describes  Constantius  as  "  uxorious,  and  as  listen- 
ing to  the  shrill  voices  of  those  courtly  parasites,  who 
governed  him  by  adulation,  and  moulded  his  will  to 
their  own  by  indulging  his  caprices."  ^     Athanasius 
confirms  this  statement  when  he  says '  that  Eusebius, 
the  Chamberlain  of  Constantius,  "  stirred  up  the  rest  of 
the  Eunuchs  against  Liberius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  and  that 
the  Eunuchs  had  great  power,  indeed  were  paramount 
with  him,  and  that  nothing  was  done  without  them." 
5.  We  need  not  therefore  be  surprised  to  find  that 
in  the   Eastern  Empire  royal  and   princely  Women 
were  enlisted  by  these  Chamberlains  on  the  side  of 
heresy  against  the  faith.     The  Church  was  too  un- 
compromising   for   them.     The   Eunuchs  as  a  class 
were  stigmatized  by  her  Canons.     And  because  she 
would  not  stoop  to  sue  for  their  favour,  or  to  cherish 
their  love  of  domination,  they  worked  by  female  in- 
fluence against  her. 

The  Mother  of  Constantine,  Helena,  sprang  from  a 
lowly  parentage,  and  belonged  to  a  simple  race  ;  and 
her  piety  and  devotion,  especially  in  Palestine,  arc 


6  Ammian.  Marcell.  xviii.  4. 

'  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  xxi.  16:  "  Uxoribus  ac  spadonum  gracilentis 
vocibus  et  palatinis  quibusdam  nimium  quantum  addictus,  ad  singula 
ejus  verba  plaudentibus." 

8  Athanasius  ad  Monachos,  §  37.  Greg.  Naz.  Or.  xxi.  §  21. 


6  Necessity  of  maintaining  the  homo-ousion. 

celebrated  in  the  history  of  the  Church.  But  the 
sister  of  Constantine,  the  widow  of  Licinius,  Con- 
stantia, ,  was  an  ardent  partisan  of  Arius,  and  com- 
mended him  to  her  brother's  favour  and  protection. 
Aurelia  Eusebia,  the  second  and  favourite  wife  of 
Constantius,  was  devoted  to  the  same  cause.  Albia 
Dominica,  the  wife  of  the  Emperor  Valens,  abetted 
him  in  his  advocacy  of  Arianism  and  persecu- 
tion of  the  Church.  In  her  hostility  to  S.  Basil  she 
had  an  imitator  in  the  Arian  widow  of  Valentinian, 
Justina,  the  enemy  of  St.  Ambrose.  The  wife  of 
Theodosius  the  Great,  Placilla,  stands  forth  as  a 
noble  and  almost  solitary  example  of  zeal  for  the 
true  faith  among  the  royal  consorts  of  the  fourth 
century. 

Such  being  the  tone  and  temper  of  the  Eastern 
Court,  it  was  not  an  easy  thing  for  the  Bishops  of  the 
Church,  especially  in  the  principal  cities,  to  resist  the 
subtle  infiltration  of  the  spirit  of  the  world  exer- 
cising its  influence  by  such  powerful  agency. 

6.  They  who  look  back  from  the  present  age  to 
the  fourth  century,  will  have  been  taught  by  the 
wisdom  of  great  men — the  learned  and  pious  cham- 
pions of  the  Faith,  and  by  the  heroic  martyrs  and 
confessors  of  it,  and  by  the  experience  of  fifteen 
centuries,  and  by  the  Holy  Spirit  dwelling  in  the 
Catholic  Church — to  understand  and  estimate  aright 
the  importance  of  the  struggle  for  the  truth,  espe- 
cially for  the  Consubstantiality  of  the  Eternal  Son  of 
God,  God  of  God,  Light  of  Light,  Very  God  of  Very 
God.  Such  persons  know  that  the  uncompromising 
maintenance  of  that  fundamental  article  of  the  true 
Faith,  the  Son's  Consubstantiality  with  the  Father, 
has  been  the  safeguard  against  the  various  forms  of 


Fickleness  of  heresy — its  dow?iwa?'d  tende?icy.  7 

veering  and  vacillating  heresy  on  the  nature  of  the 
Son  of  God,  which  have  attempted  to  supplant  it. 
Not  less  than  sixteen  different  formularies  of  belief^ 
in  the  course  of  little  more  than  fifty  years  were 
devised  by  Arians,  Semi-Arians,  and  Anomoeans  in 
lieu  of  the  faith  of  Nicaea.  Error  is  various,  Truth 
is  one.  And  the  word  HOMO-OUSIOS,  or  CONSUB- 
STANTIAL,  remains,  and  ever  will  remain  — like  the 
Bush  at  Horeb — burning,  but  never  consumed. 

In  vain  did  the  adversaries  allege  that  this  word  con- 
sub  staiitia  lis  not  found  in  Holy  Scripture  :  as  if  the  tnie 
sense  of  Scripture  were  not  Scripture,  andasif  the77<5';;/^- 
onsio7ih.did  not  been  abundantly  proved  from  Scripture;^ 
and  as  if  the  Arlan  substitutes  for  it  were  Scriptural, 
either  in  word  or  in  sense.  In  vain  did  Arians  affirm 
that  the  term  consiibstantial  led  to  Sabellianism  ; 
forgetting  that  their  own  formularies  were  chargeable 
with  Tritheism  or  with  Creature-worship.  In  vain 
did  they  plead  that  the  abandonment  of  the  Homo- 
oiisios  would  be  a  prudent  compromise,  and  happy 
eirenicon  ;  as  if  the  conflicts  between  Semi-arians 
and  Anomceans  were  not  as  virulent  and  furious  as 
those  of  either,  or  of  both,  against  the  Church  of  Christ. 

While  Heresy  was  thus  fickle  and  fleeting,  Athana- 
sius  and  his  friends  remained  firm  and  steadfast,  and 
never  accepted  a  new  Creed  (from  any  of  the  various 
successive  Synods  of  Arianism),  nor  ever  abandoned 
the  old  one. 

They  who  read  the  history  of  the  times  calmly, 
know  how  disastrous  and  fatal  would  have  been  the 

8  They  may  be  seen  enumerated  in  the  Abbe  Fleury's  Hist.  Eccles. 
iii.  106,  and  in  Canon  Bright's  Church  History,  Oxford,  1875,  3rd  edit., 
p.  116. 

1  See  above,  vol.  i,  of  the  present  work,  p.  452. 


8  Bearing  of  the  homo-ousion  on  the  Holy  Ghosfs  Godhead. 

consequences  if  Athanaslus  had  accepted  the  proffered 
substitutes  for  the  Nicene  faith.  All  the  variations 
of  Arianism  had  a  downward  tendency;  they  ulti- 
mately led  (as  logically  they  must)  to  the  denial  of 
the  Godhead  of  the  Son,  and  to  its  disastrous 
results,  as  to  Faith  and  Practice,  Sacraments  and 
Worship.^ 

Besides,  if  the  Homo-ousion  of  the  Son  of  God  had 
not  been  maintained  by  Athanasius,  the  controversy 
which  was  soon  to  arise  on  the  Godhead  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  could  never  have  had  a  right  solution.^ 

If  the  Homo-ousion  of  the  Son  had  been  abandoned, 
the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Ghost's  divinity  would  have 
perished  in  the  shipwreck  of  the  faith.  If  the  creed 
of  Nicaea  had  not  been  maintained  by  Athanasius, 
that  of  Constantinople  would  have  been  impossible. 
The  Arians  were  the  lineal  forefathers  of  the  Mace- 
donians ;  and  though  Athanasius  died  eight  years 
before  the  Council  of  Constantinople,  which  re- 
affirmed the  Creed  of  Nicsea  and  added  to  it  those 
words  which  assert  the  divinity  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
yet  virtually  his  faith,  his  courage,  his  patience,  his 
wisdom,  and  his  charity,  and  that  of  those  who 
acted  with  him,  were,  under  the  Divine  Blessing, 
the  main  causes  of  the  victory  of  the  Church  in  her 
Second  general  Synod  in  A.D.  381. 

The  same  may  be  said  with  regard  to  the  Apolli- 
narian  Heresy,  which  denied  that  Christ  had  a 
reasonable  human  soul,  and  which  was  condemned 

2  See  above,  vol.  i.  chap.  xxvi. 

3  On  the  connexion  of  Arianism  with  Macedonianism,  i.e.  the  denial 
of  the  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  see  the  Letters  of  Athanasius  to  his 
friend  and  Brother  Bishop  Serapion,  p.  517,  ed.  Bened.  Patav.  1777, 
and  the  learned  remarks  of  Montfaucon,  Proef.  p.  xxx. 


Coisequeiices  of  waiit  of  Sacrajuental  grace.  9 

at  Constantinople.  This  also  he  refuted  by  anticipa- 
tion/ 

7.  A  history  of  the  Church  can  hardly  satisfy  the 
legitimate  desires  of  faithful  and  thoughtful  readers  if 
it  does  not  endeavour  to  take  into  account  the  work- 
ing of  divine  grace  by  means  of  the  Christian  Sacra- 
ments, and  if  it  does  not  note  the  effects  of  the  lack  of 
that  grace. 

In  considering  the  relations  of  the  first  Christian 
Emperors  to  the  Church  there  is  much  that  is  note- 
worthy in  this  respect.  The  first  two  Christian  Em- 
perors, Constantine  and  Constantius,  seem  to  have  had 
a  craving  appetite  for  dogmatism.  To  take  the  lead  in 
settling  controversies  of  faith,  appears  to  have  been 
to  them  an  almost  feverish  passion.  But  unhappily 
for  them  and  for  the  Church,  neither  of  them  had  the 
benefit  of  that  spiritual  guidance  and  illumination 
which  flow  from  Sacramental  Grace,  and  from  the 
moral  dispositions  preparatory  to  its  reception. 

Neither  of  them  received  Holy  Baptism  before  the 
close  of  life.  Neither  of  them  had  the  benefit  of  the 
Eucharistic  indwelling  of  that  Divine  Person  and 
Presence,  concerning  Which  they  disputed  with  so 
much  eagerness  in  the  Synods  of  the  Church.  Con- 
stantine's  delay  of  Baptism  had  something  of  super- 
stitious formalism  in  it.  He  had  been  desirous,  he 
said,  of  receiving  Baptism  in  the  waters  of  the  same 
river  in  which  his  Saviour  had  been  baptized.^  Per- 
haps the  Bishops  of  his  court  were  not  willing  to 
administer  Baptism  without  the  previous  Canonical 
Penance  enjoined  by  the  Church  on  one   who  had 

*  See  his  Epistle  to  Epictetus,  p.  720,  and  his  two  books  against 
Apollinarius,  p.  733,  736,  and  Montfaucon,  ibid.  p.  xxx. 
'  Euseb.  Vit.  Const,  iv.  62. 


lo         Constantine  and  Constantius — delay  of  baptism. 

perpetrated  such  crimes  as  the  murder  of  his  own 
son,  Crispus,  and  his  wife,  Fausta.  Perhaps  in  humility 
and  remorse  Constantine  had  scrupled  to  ask  for  Bap- 
tism till  the  time  when  he  hoped  to  receive  therein 
plenary  remission  of  past  sins,  and  to  be  exempt 
from  the  danger  of  falling  into  others. 

Something  of  the  same  feeling  may  have  operated 
on  the  mind  of  Constantius,  whose  accession  to  the 
throne  had  been  stained  by  sanguinary  assassinations 
of  his  nearest  relatives,^  and  who  encouraged  those 
wild  and  frantic  persecutions  of  the  Catholics  at 
Alexandria  in  the  days  of  its  Arian  Bishops  Gregory 
and  George  of  Cappadocia,  which  equalled  in 
barbarous  outrages  the  most  savage  cruelties  per- 
petrated on  the  Church  by  Heathenism  in  the  days 
of  Decius,  Valerian,  and  Diocletian,  and  in  some 
respects  were  far  more  disastrous,  because  they  were 
perpetrated  on  Christians  in  the  name  of  Christianity. 

That  Constantius  should  have  been  allowed  by 
Christian  Bishops  to  be  swayed  by  such  influences  as 
have  been  described,  and  by  the  example  and  teach- 
ing of  such  partisans  of  Arianism  as  Eusebius,  first 
Bishop  of  Berytus,  then  of  Nicomedia — and  thence 
translated  to  Constantinople — and  that  he  should 
never  have  been  subject  to  the  discipline,  and  guided 
by  the  training  of  the  Catholic  Church,  has  been 
deplored  by  one  of  our  greatest  Theologians  in  his 
sketch  of  the  history  of  these  times.'  And  that  Con- 
stantius should  have  been  left  destitute  of  that  spiritual 
grace  which,  as  the  same  writer  has  shown,  is  dispensed 
from    above,   through  communion  with    our    Divine 

6  Ammianus  Marcellin.  xxi.  6  :  "  Inter  imperandi  exordia  cunctos 
sanguine  et  genere  se  contingentes  turpiter  interemit." 

7  Hooker,  Eccl.  Pol.,  book  v.  chap,  xliii. 


Contrast  in  Thcodosius  the  Great — Preaching.         1 1 

Lord,  Very  God  and  Very  Man,  in  Sacraments,^  did 
not  redound  to  the  honour  of  those,  especially  Prelates 
of  the  Church,  who  were  admitted  to  the  nearest 
intimacy  with  him. 

A  noble  contrast  to  Constantius  and  to  these 
Bishops,  was  afterwards  displayed  by  the  greatest 
of  Christian  Emperors,  Theodosius,  and  by  one  of  the 
greatest  of  Christian  Bishops,  S.  Ambrose,  Bishop  of 
Milan.  Early  in  his  imperial  career,  Theodosius  was 
admitted  to  Christian  Baptism.^  His  longing  desires 
for  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Eucharist  at  the  Festival  of 
Christmas,  after  he  had  been  debarred  from  it  by 
salutary  discipline  administered  by  S.  Ambrose  at 
Milan,^  and  his  generous  testimony  to  the  faithful- 
ness and  courage  of  the  Bishop  who  rebuked  him,  are 
among  the  brightest  examples  in  Church  History  ; 
and  it  appears  to  have  been  a  just  honour  reserved  for 
that  intrepid  soldier  of  the  Cross  as  well  as  in  the 
battle-field,  Theodosius,  that  he  should  have  been 
made  a  chosen  instrument  of  God's  providence  in 
summoning  that  Council — the  Council  of  Constan- 
tinople, which  delivered  to  the  Church  the  Creed  in 
which  the  true  faith  in  the  Ever-Blessed  Trinity  has 
sounded  throughout  the  world  from  that  day  to  the 
present  hour. 

8.  The  Church  of  God  has  been  divinely  appointed 
to  operate  upon  the  human  heart,  not  only  by  the 
ministry  of  the  Sacraments,  but  by  that  of  Preaching. 

In  the  age  which  we  are  now  about  to  contemplate 
the    Christian   Pulpit  exercised   a   power,    unknown 


®  Ibid.,  book  v.  ch.  1. — ch.  Ivii. 

*  A.D.  381,  by  Ascolius,  Bishop  of  Thessalonica. 

^  A.D.  390,  De  obitu  Theodosii,  Sozomen,  vii.  25. 


12     Influoice  of  the  Wotid  on  the  Pulpit — its  character. 

since  the  time  of  the  Apostles^  and  perhaps  hardly 
equalled  in  any  after-ages. 

Gregory  Nazianzen  says  in  his  oration  on  Athana- 
sius/  that  he  was  resisted  and  attacked  by  the  most 
eloquent  of  Bishops,  whose  name  he  declines  to  men- 
tion. It  is  not  quite  certain  who  this  Bishop  was. 
Probably  it  was  Eusebius  himself,  the  Bishop  of 
Caesarea,  the  Ecclesiastical  Historian,  the  friend  and 
biographer  of  Constantine. 

In  estimating  the  dangers  of  the  Church,  and  of  the 
faith,  we  must  not  forget  the  influence  of  Preaching. 
The  spirit  of  the  world  had  found  an  entrance  into 
the  Pulpit.  Some  of  the  greatest  of  Christian  orators 
had  been  pupils  in  the  schools  of  heathen  sophists  and 
rhetoricians  at  Antioch,  Nicomedia,  Constantinople, 
and  Athens ;  and  the  hyperbolical  language  of  the 
Imperial  Court,  which  gloried  in  such  high-sounding 
titles  as  "  illustres,"  "  clarissimi/'  "  perfectissimi,"  ^  and 
which  addressed  the  Emperor  as  *^  your  Eternity,"  had 
a  baneful  influence  on  the  Church. 

It  was  fortunate  for  Athanasius  that  he  had  not  been 
trained  in  such  a  discipline.  He  had  been  a  care- 
ful student  of  Homer  and  Plato  (as  is  evident  from  his 
Oration  against  the  Heathen),  and  Demosthenes,  as 
appears  from  the  nervous  energy  of  his  style,  and  the 
incisive  acumen  of  his  sentences.*     But  Athanasius 

2  Orat.  xxi.  §  21. 

^  Gibbon,  Decline  and  Fall,  chap.  xvii.  ;  De  Broglie,  De  I'figlise  et 
I'Empire,  ii.  189,  Paris,  1867,  5eme  edition. 

4  See  the  Letter  of  Erasmus  to  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln  (John 
Longlands),  quoted  by  Montfaucon,  on  the  style  of  Athanasius,  and 
Montfaucon's  own  excellent  observations,  pp.  xxi  and  xxii  of  his  edition 
Patav.  1777;  and  on  Gregory  Nazianzen,  Chrysostom,  and  Basil,  who 
most  resembles  Athanasius.  "Athanasius  plerumque  pressus  ac  brevis 
est,  et  majore  sententiarum  quam  verborum  ubertate.  Longe  prsestat 
salibus,  nervis,  et  t^  ivT6v(a  redundantiam  omnem  resecante." 


Athanasius — Eusehius  of  Ccesarea — Gregory  Nazianzen.  13 

was  not  ambitious  of  florid  eloquence  ;  Christian  logic, 
and  not  secular  rhetoric,  was  the  weapon  with  which 
he  fought. 

Let  us  not  judge  harshly  of  Eusebius  of  Caesarea, 
exposed  to  such  intoxicating  temptations  as  that  of 
pronouncing  before  a  great  audience,  at  the  consecra- 
tion of  one  of  the  noblest  Churches  in  Christendom, 
a  panegyrical  harangue  on  the  piety  of  its  Founder, 
the  imperial  Master  of  the  world  ;  and  permitted  to 
deliver  an  eulogy  upon  the  Emperor  in  his  own  pre- 
sence (who  remained  standing)  in  his  palace  at 
Constantinople.^  Such  trials  to  one  who  had  lately 
emerged  from  the  darkness  of  obscurity  and  the  hard- 
ships of  persecution,  into  a  noonday  blaze  of  court 
favour,  dazzled  the  eye  and  made  the  brain  dizzy. 
It  was  like  the  Tempter's  display  of  the  world's  glory 
in  the  eyes  of  the  Lord  of  all.  It  was  too  much  for 
the  temperament  of  Eusebius,  and  for  some  of  his 
contemporary  Prelates. 

S.  Jerome  relates  that  the  celebrated  Christian 
Orator,  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,^  under  whom  he  studied 
at  Constantinople,  and  who  was  for  a  short  time 
Bishop  of  that  city,  in  answer  to  S.  Jerome's  question 
on  the  meaning  of  the  difficult  phrase  in  St.  Luke's 
Gospel  (vi.  l)  aaB(3aTov  BevrepoTrpcorov  ("the  second 
Sabbath   after  the  first")  replied  that  he  had  rather 

*  Euseb.  Vit.  Const,  iv.  45  and  46,  and  the  Oration  itself  at  the  end 
of  that  Life. 

^  Nazianz«j — this  form  is  more  correct  than  the  one  sometimes  used 
now,  NazianzMW.  Theodoret  has,  in  the  feminine  gender,  r]  No^joi/^oy, 
Eccles.  Hist.  v.  8. 

The  edition  of  Theodoret  from  which  I  quote  is  that  of  Schulze, 
HaHs  Saxonum,  1771,  which  contains  references  to  the  chapters  as 
marked  in  the  previous  editions  of  Basle,  Stephens, Christophorson,  and 
Valesius,  which  has  been  reprinted  by  Dean  Gaisford,  Oxon.  1854. 


14  Influence  and  character  of  the  Pulpit. 

explain  it  to  him  in  the  Church  ;  and  that  he  would 
do  it  in  such  a  manner  that  the  people  would  applaud 
him  J  The  plaudits  of  the  people  were  not  wholesome 
to  the  preacher.  "  Non  mihi  plausum  sed  tibi  planc- 
tum  quaero,"  was  the  wise  saying  of  another  great 
Christian  Orator.^  A  Greek  or  Asiatic  audience  was 
easily  excited,  and  its  sensibility  was  a  danger  for 
those  who  addressed  it.  The  sight  of  the  glancing 
pens  of  the  shorthand  writers  eagerly  taking  down 
the  sermon  under  the  pulpit— the  crowds  pressing  on 
the  balustrades  of  the  sanctuary  in  which  he  stood 
and  preached — the  burst  of  vehement  emotion  ex- 
pressing itself  by  gestures,  plaudits,  and  acclamations, 
these  were  a  trying  ordeal  for  the  Christian  orator  at 
Constantinople  and  in  other  great  cities  of  the  East. 
In  reading  some  of  S.  Gregory's  orations,  especially 
his  panegyrical  harangues  on  S.  Athanasius  himself, 
on  S.  Basil,  on  his  own  father,  and  others,  we  feel  that 
the  Preacher  has  been  often  carried  away  by  the 
passions  of  his  audience,  and  has  been  tempted  to  add 
fuel  to  the  flame. 

Nor  was  this  the  case  only  with  the  language  of 
eulogy.  The  art  of  Rhetoric,  practised  at  that  time 
in  the  schools  of  this  world's  Eloquence  by  such 
persons  as  Libanius  and  Themistius,  was  sometimes 
abused  in  the  Pulpit  to  gratify  the  ignobler  feelings 
of  anger  and  revenge.  The  Church  echoed  with 
Philippics.  The  sarcastic  harangues  of  S.  Gregory 
and  S.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  against  Julian_,  even  after 

'  Jerome,  Epist.  xxxiv.  ad  Nepotian.  Large  historical  collections  on 
the  subject  of  applause  and  acclamation — which  passed  from  the  Theatre 
to  the  Senate,  and  thence  into  the  Church — may  be  seen  in  Suicer's 
"  Thesaurus,"  v.  /cp({Tos,and  in  Bingham,  x\nt.  xiv.  4.  27. 

^  S.  Bernard. 


Triumphs  of  sacred  Eloquence —  Working  of  Heresy     1 5 
and  Schism. 
his  death,  betrayed  the  weakness  of  hnman  nature, 
swayed  by  the  spirit  of  the  world  rather  than  of  the 
Gospel. 

To  his  honour  be  it  spoken,  we  find  no  such  abuse  of 
the  Christian  Pulpit  in  the  works  of  him  whose  temper 
was  most  sorely  tried  by  the  ill-treatment  he  received 
from  worldly  powers  acting  in  the  Church — Athanasius. 
In  speaking  thus  we  must  not  forget  the  noble 
orations  of  S.  Gregory  himself  at  Constantinople  in 
defence  of  the  true  faith  in  evil  days,  especially  in 
those  grand  dogmatic  sermons  at  Constantinople  ^ 
which  justly  procured  for  him  the  title  of  "  the  Theo- 
logian ;"  nor  can  we  ignore  the  magnificent  discourses 
of  his  friend,  S.  Basil,  at  Caesarea,  on  the  marvels  of 
the  six  days  of  Creation,  and  on  the  great  articles  of 
Christian  Doctrine  and  Duty  ;  ^  and  of  his  brother, 
Gregory  of  Nyssa  ;  and  in  the  next  age  the  inimitable 
ethical  and  spiritual  homilies  of  S.  John  Chrysostom 
at  Antioch  and  Constantinople,  on  the  principal  books 
of  Holy  Scripture,  and  on  Christian  belief  and  prac- 
tice, which  will  never  fail  to  minister  delight  and  in- 
struction to  the  faithful  of  every  age  and  clime. 

9.  But  to  proceed.  The  Spirit  of  the  World  in  the 
Church  operated  against  the  Faith  by  Arianism  in  its 
various  phases  ;  and  Arianism  enlisted  on  its  side 
the  discordant  elements  of  Schism,  Judaism,  and 
Heathenism  ;  and  with  these  allies  it  warred  against 
the  Truth. 

Schism  was  then  represented  by  the  Meletians  in 
Egypt,  and  by  the  Donatists  in  Africa. 

The  Meletians  derived  their  Episcopal  Succession 
from  Meletius,  Bishop  of  Scythopolis,  in  the  lower 

*  *'  On  Theology  " — see  below,  chapter  viii. 

*  See  below,  chap.  vii. 


1 6       Meietlans  and  Dona  fists — The  Church  injured  by 

failings  in  her  adherents. 
Thebald,  who  had  been  excommunicated  for  apostasy 
and  idolatry  by  St.  Peter,  Bishop  of  Alexandria, 
about  A.D.  302,2  ^^^  Y^^^  formed  a  schismatical  sect 
against  him  and  the  Church.  At  the  Council  of 
Nicsea  Meletius  himself  was  deposed  as  the  leader  of 
the  schism,  but  the  Meletian  Bishops  were  received 
to  communion,  and  were  allowed  to  retain  their  Epis- 
copal dignity,'  but  not  to  exercise  any  Episcopal 
functions  except  in  subordination  to  the  Catholic 
Bishops,  and  to  the  authority  of  the  Bishop  of  Alex- 
andria. We  shall  see  in  the  following  pages  that  they 
were  thorns  in  the  side  of  Athanasius. 

The  rise  of  the  Donatistic  sectaries  has  been 
already  described.*  They  also  were  enlisted  by 
Arianism  as  its  allies  against  him. 

Nor  did  Arianism  scruple  to  excite  the  Jews  and 
Heathens  to  acts  of  violence  and  outrage  against  him 
and  the  faithful,  especially  at  Alexandria. 

10.  Besides,  as  we  shall  see,  the  cause  of  Truth  was 
damaged  by  failings  in  some  of  its  leading  adherents, 
by  unsoundness  in  some  articles  of  faith,  or  by  excess 
of  zeal  and  lack  of  wisdom  and  charity. 

This  was  remarkably  exemplified  in  the  cases  of 
Marcellus,  Bishop  of  Ancyra  in  Galatia,  and  of 
Lucifer,  Bishop  of  Cagliari  in  Sardinia. 

Marcellus  had  been  a  courageous  champion  of  the 
Church  against  the  Sophist  Asterius,  and  he  was  a 
fellow-labourer  and  fellow-sufferer  with  Athanasius  in 
his  conflicts  and  persecution.     But  he  exposed  him- 


2  S.  Athanas.  Apol.  c.  Arian.  §  59.  The  edition  of  Athanasius  to 
which  I  refer  is  that  of  the  learned  Benedictine  Montfaucon,  Patav. 
1777,  4  vols,  folio. 

^  Theodoret,  i.  8 ;  Socrat.  i.  9. 

*  Above,  vol.  i.  pp.  321,  401,  404,  408. 


Luciferians :  Fall  of  Hosius  and  Liberius.  1 7 

self  to  the  charge  of  SabeHianlsm  and  Photinianism, 
and  thus  he  created  prejudice  against  the  cause  which 
he  sought  to  defend  against  its  Arian  opponents.^ 

Lucifer  of  Cagliari  was  a  bold  and  heroic  confessor 
of  the  faith  ;  but  he  injured  the  Church  by  his  intem- 
perate and  passionate  invectives  against  the  Emperor 
Constantius,  and  by  the  rigorous  severity  with  which 
he  alienated  those  who  might  have  been  recovered  to 
its  communion  from  Arianism,  and  which  betrayed 
him  into  the  formation  of  a  rival  sect  bearing  his 
name,  and  not  very  different  in  its  principles  from  the 
schisms  of  Novatianism  and  Donatism.^ 

II.  But  the  Church  had  severer  trials  in  the 
fall  of  Hosius,  the  Bishop  of  Corduba,  in  A.D.  357, 
and  soon  after  it,  of  Liberius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  and 
in  the  total  collapse  of  the  Catholic  Bishops  at 
Ariminum^  in  A.D.  359. 

Hosius  had  been  a  confessor  in  heathen  persecu- 
tion under  Maximian  ;  he  had  been  the  trusted  friend 
and  adviser  of  Constantine,  and  had  taken  the  lead 
at  the  Nicene  Council,^  in  framing  the  Nicene  Creed  ; 
and  Lad  afterwards  presided  at  the  Council  of 
Sardica,  A.D.  344.  By  reason  of  his  great  age  (he 
was  more  than  a  hundred  years  old  at  the  time  of  his 
fall),  his  piety,  learning,  and  dignity,  he  was  regarded 
as  the  spiritual  "  Father  of  Bishops,^'  as  Athanasius 
calls  him,^  and  of  all  Christendom.^"  But  wearied  out 
by  a  year's  banishment,  broken  in  health,  and  racked 

*  Epiphan.  Hser.  72.     S.  Hilary,  Frag.  ii.  p.  639,  ed.  Migne. 

^  See  S.  Jerome's  dialogue  c.  Luciferianos,  torn.  iv.  p.  300,  ed.Bened. 
Paris,  1706;  and  below,  p.  32. 
'  Rimini  in  Italy. 

*  See  above,  vol.  i.  pp.  402,  422,  447. 
^  Athanas.  ad  Monachos,  §  46. 

!<>  See  Hooker's  description  of  him,  book  V.  ch.  xlii. 

VOL.  II.  C 


1 8  Fall  of  Hosius  ;  and  of  Liberius. 

by  torture,  he  at  length,  in  A.D.  357,  yielded  to  the 
threats  and  temptations  of  the  Emperor,  and  subscribed 
at  Sirmium  a  Creed  framed  by  Valens,  Ursacius, 
and  Potamius,  the  bitter  enemies  of  Athanasius, 
which  expressly  rejected  the  term  consitbstaiitialy  and 
thus  renounced  in  its  vital  point  the  faith  of  Nicsea. 
But  he  refused  to  condemn  Athanasius.  On  these 
terms  he  obtained  permission  to  return  to  his  own 
country,  where  he  soon  afterwards  died  with  words 
of  remorse  on  his  lips.  According  to  Athanasius,^ 
he  protested  on  his  death-bed  that  what  he  had  done 
had  been  extorted  from  him  by  force  ;  he  then  con- 
demned the  Arian  heresy  and  delivered  a  solemn 
warning  against  it. 

The  fall  of  Liberius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  was  probably 
accelerated  by  that  of  Hosius.  But  it  was  still  more 
calamitous.  Liberius  had  mourned  over  the  lapse  of 
his  own  Legate,  Vincent,  Bishop  of  Capua ;  ^  he  had 
nobly  resisted  Constantius  face  to  face  at  Milan,  when 
the  Emperor  told  him  that  he  should  consider  a 
victory  over  Athanasius  to  be  a  nobler  triumph  than 
over  any  of  his  enemies  in  battle  ^ — such  as  Magnen- 
tius  or  Silvanus.  Liberius  stood  firm  and  defended 
Athanasius,  and  rejected  all  the  overtures  of  the 
Emperor,  and  was  banished  by  him  to  Beroea  in 
Thrace. 

But  at  length  in  A.D.  358,  after  two  years'  exile,  he 
also  was  worn  out  by  privation  and  hardship,  and  by 
threats  of  death."*  He  longed  to  return  to  Rome. 
Demophilus,  Bishop  of  Beroea,  was  at  his  side,  and 

1  Ibid.  §  45. 

2  Hilar.  Fragment  vi.  p.  676,  where  Liberius  says,  in  writing  to 
Hosius,  that  "he  had  resolved  to  die  rather  than  follow  his  example." 

3  Theodoret,  ii.  13.  ^  Ath.   ad  Mon.  §  41. 


Apostasy  at  Arlmi?iuin.  1 9 

tempted  him  to  subscribe  an  Arian  confession.  In 
the  words  of  a  Roman  Catholic  Church  Historian/ 
"  Liberius  renounced  the  communion  of  Athanasius, 
and  embraced  that  of  the  Easterns,  that  is  of  the 
Arians.  He  addressed  a  letter  to  the  Emperor  in 
which  he  requested  to  be  restored  to  his  see.  He 
also  wrote  thus  to  the  Easterns,  *  I  do  not  defend 
Athanasius,  whom  I  received  to  communion  because 
my  predecessor,  Julius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  had  done  so. 
But  now  it  has  so  pleased  God  that  I  am  persuaded 
that  you  have  condemned  him  justly,  and  I  have  at 
once  assented  to  your  judgment,  and  I  reject  him 
from  communion.  And  since  our  brother  Demophi- 
lus  has  proposed  to  me  the  true  Catholic  faith,  which 
many  of  our  brother  Bishops  have  examined  at  Sir- 
mium,  I  have  accepted  it  willingly,  and  have  nothing 
to  say  against  it.'  " 

Liberius  wrote  also  to  his  former  Legate,  Vincent, 
Bishop  of  Capua,  who  was  in  favour  with  the  Emperor, 
to  the  sam.e  effect,  and  solicited  his  influence  with 
Constantius,  that  he  might  be  delivered  from  his 
exile  and  confinement,  and  return  to  his  see  at  Rome  ; 
and  he  charged  him  to  communicate  to  all  the 
Bishops  of  Campania  the  contents  of  his  letter.  "  Thus 
it  was,"  adds  Fleury,  "that  Liberius  abandoned  S. 
Athanasius,  whose  cause  was  inseparable  from  that  of 
the  true  faith." ^ 

12.  But  the  most  terrible  calamity  of  all  was  the 
almost  total  prostration  of  the  Catholic  cause  at 
Ariminum,  A.D.  359,  about  two  years  before  the  death 

5  The  Abbe  Fleury,  torn.  iii.  p.  468,  ed.  171 8. 

^  The  details  above  inserted  are  supplied  by  S.  Hilary,  Frag.  vi.  ed. 
Bened.  pp.  678 — 683,  or  torn.  ii.  pp.  688 — 695,  ed.  Migne,  Paris,  1S45. 
See  also  Athanas.  Apo  1.  adv.  Arianos,  §  89,  and  ad  Monachos,  §  41. 


20       Wreck  of  the  faith  at  Rimini.    S.  Greg.  Nazianzen. 

of  Constantius  and  the  accession  of  Julian  to  the 
imperial  throne. 

The  causes  of  this  ruin  will  be  narrated  in  their 
proper  place  in  the  following  pages.  Suffice  it  now 
to  describe  it  in  the  words  of  three  ancient  authors. 

S.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  whose  father  was  one  who 
fell  in  that  rout  of  the  Episcopate,  describes  it  as  an 
earthquake;  "all  the  Bishops  became  subject  to  the 
sway  of  time  ;  other  difference  there  was  none  among 
them,  except  that  some  fell  away  sooner  than  the 
rest,  and  some  after  the  others ;  and  that  some  were 
leaders  in  the  band  of  impiety,  and  others  were  in  the 
second  rank,  either  cast  down  by  fear,  or  enslaved  by 
penury,  or  ensnared  by  flattery,  or  beguiled  through 
simplicity — which  was  the  most  venial  case  of  all."^ 

S.  Jerome  writes  more  fully  as  follows  : — "  When 
the  Council  of  Ariminum  (or  Rimini)  was  over,  all  the 
Bishops  returned  with  joy  to  their  provinces.  The 
Emperor  (Constantius)  and  all  good  men  had  one 
common  desire,  that  the  East  should  be  united  with 
the  West.  But  evil  deeds  do  not  long  lie  hid.  A 
wound  being  ill  scarred  over  soon  discharges  its  puru- 
lent virus  ;  Valens  and  Ursacius,  and  their  Arian  ac- 
complices in  impiety,  vaunted  their  victory,  and 
declared  that  in  the  Council  of  Rimini  they  had  not 
denied  the  Son  of  God  to  be  a  creature^  but  only  to 
be  a  creature  like  other  creatures. 

7  S.  Greg.  Nazian.  Orat.  xxi.  de  Athan.  §  24,  p.  401,  ed.  Bened. 
Richard  Hooker's  celebrated  description  of  the  Council  of  Ariminum 
in  book  v.  chap.  xlii.  is  httle  more  than  a  literal  translation  from 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  whose  name  is  not  mentioned  by  Hooker  nor  in  any 
edition  of  Hooker's  works.  This  is  one  of  several  similar  instances  in 
Hooker's  writings  ;  see  above,  vol.  i.  p.  282  and  p.  387.  And  may 
I  refer  to  my  Introduction  to  the  Psalms,  p.  xv,  where  Hooker's 
beautiful  encomium  on  the  Psalms  is  merely  a  paraphrase  from  S.  Basil  ? 


6".  Jerome  and  S.  Augustine  07i  the  ruin  at  Rimini.      2 1 

"  Then  it  was  that  the  word  substance  was  abolished. 
Then  the  condemnation  of  the  Nicene  Faith  was  pro- 
claimed to  the  world.  The  World  groaned  and  was 
amazed  to  find  itself  Arian.  Thereupon  some 
remained  within  their  own  communion  ;  others  sent 
letters  to  those  confessors  who  were  in  banishment 
for  the  name  of  Athanasius.  Some  mourned  in 
despair  over  their  own  fellowship  with  heretics  ; 
others — as  human  nature  is  prone  to  do — defended 
their  error  as  a  deliberate  act  of  judgment. 

"  The  Apostolic  Bark  was  in  jeopardy,  it  was 
buffeted  by  winds,  its  timbers  were  beaten  by  waves. 
No  hope  was  left.  But  the  Lord  awoke.  The  wild 
beast  (Constantius)  dies.  Calm  returns.  The  Bishops, 
banished  from  their  sees,  are  restored  by  the  clemency 
of  the  new  Emperor  (Julian).  Egypt  welcomes  again 
her  triumphant  hero,  Athanasius.  The  Churches  of 
Gaul  greet  their  own  Hilary  coming  back  from  the 
battle-field  of  the  faith.  Italy  puts  off  her  mourning 
weeds  at  the  return  of  Eusebius  of  Vercellae.  The 
Bishops  who  had  been  ensnared  by  the  wiles  of 
Ariminum,  and  who  were  regarded  as  heretics  against 
their  own  conscientious  convictions,  protest  by  the 
Body  of  the  Lord  and  by  whatever  is  holy  in  the 
Church,  that  they  had  never  dreamt  of  any  evil  in 
their  own  profession  of  faith.  Our  own  good  opinion 
of  evil  men,  they  said,  deceived  us." 

After  S.  Jerome,  S.Augustine  thus  wrote :^ — "  When 
Athanasius,  that  man  of  indomitable  constancy  and 
most  holy  faith,  at  a  time  when  all  the  world  had 
fallen  from  the  faith  of  the  Apostles,  resisted  the 
torrent  of  those  evil  times,  and  had  therefore  been 
driven  into  exile,  scarcely  seven  (they  say)  of  650 
8  S.  Augustine,  Opus  Imperfect,  c.  Julian,  c.  75. 


22  The  E?n_peror  Julian, 

Bishops  were  found  who  loved  the  commandments 
of  God  rather  than  those  of  the  Emperor,  and  who 
refused  to  agree  to  the  condemnation  of  Athanasius, 
and  to  renounce  the  confession  of  the  Trinity." 

Such  was  the  condition  of  the  Church  after  the 
Council  of  Rimini. 

13.  Her  peace  under  the  Emperor  Julian  was  not  of 
long  duration.  It  is  probable  that  Julian's  fall  from  the 
Christian  faith  in  which  he  had  been  brought  up  was 
due  to  the  acts  of  those  who  professed  zeal  for 
Christianity,  and  in  its  name  were  guilty  of  acts  which 
even  heathen  Philosophy  condemned.  The  strifes  of 
the  Church  produced  impiety  on  the  Throne.  The 
name  of  his  Christian  predecessor  in  the  Empire,  his 
own  cousin,  Constantius,  the  great  imperial  dogmatist, 
was  especially  odious  to  him.  He  had  murdered  the 
nearest  kindred  of  Julian  to  make  a  clearer  way  for 
his  own  accession  and  that  of  his  two  brothers  Con- 
stantine  and  Constans  to  the  throne  of  the  Caesars. 
Eusebius,  Bishop  of  Nicomedia,  who  was  a  relative 
of  Julian  and  had  the  charge  of  his  early  education, 
had  shown  himself  to  be  swayed  by  worldly  ambi- 
tion. And  with  many  other  Bishops  in  high  place, 
he  had  been  leagued  in  vindictive  hate  and  in  a 
public  conspiracy  against  Athanasius,  in  Councils  of 
the  Church.  They  had  been  confederate  with  Jews 
and  Heathens  against  him.  To  Julian's  philosophic 
indifference  it  was  a  matter  of  little  interest,  which 
party  of  the  two, — Arians  or  Athanasians, — were  in 
the  right.  He  saw  a  bitter  feud  raging  between  them. 
The  worldliness,  the  pride,  the  ambition,  the  malig- 
nity, the  craftiness  and  cruelty  of  some  in  high  place 
in  the  Church,  helped  to  make  Julian  an  apostate. 
He  became  a  cruel  persecutor  in  spite  of  his  profes- 


Jovian — Valens — death  of  Athanasiits.  23 

sions  of  toleration.  Alexandria  was  a  scene  of  riot 
and  bloodshed.  Christians  were  massacred  by 
Heathens  and  Jews,  and  Julian  looked  calmly  on, 
and  banished  Athanasius  from  his  see.^ 

14.  Athanasius  had  a  presentiment  that  the  storm 
of  persecution  under  Julian  would  soon  pass  by. 

But  he  was  grievously  disappointed  when  he  saw 
that  the  calm  which  followed  under  Jovian,  his 
imperial  pupil,  was  still  more  short, — only  eight 
months  in  duration — and  was  succeeded  by  the  reign 
of  Valens  in  the  East,  who,  under  the  influence  of  his 
Arian  wife,  became  another  Constantius  ;  and  issued 
an  edict  that  all  Bishops  who  had  been  banished  by 
Constantius,  and  who  had  returned  under  Julian, 
should  be  again  driven  from  their  sees.^  Athanasius 
was  again  threatened  with  exile,  but  was  spared  in 
deference  to  the  earnest  wishes  of  his  flock,^  and 
perhaps  to  the  remonstrances  of  Valentinian,  the 
elder  brother  of  Valens,  and  Catholic  Emperor  in  the 
West ;  and  at  length,  after  an  Episcopate  of  forty- 
seven  years,  he  died  in  peace  at  Alexandria,  on  the 
2nd  of  May,  A.D.  373,^  eight  years  before  the  Council 
of  Constantinople  in  the  second  year  of  Theodosius 
the  Great ;  which,  though  Athanasius  did  not  live  to 
see  it,  owed,  under  God,  its  life,  its  spirit,  and  its  acts 
to  him,  and  to  which  the  whole  Catholic  Church  is 
indebted,  under  her  Divine  Head,  for  the  Creed  by 
which  she  has  now  been  united  for  1500  years  in 
professing  the  true  faith. 

^  Theodoret,  iii.  5.  Socr.  iii.  13,  14.  Sozomen,  v.  15,  p.  104. 
Julian,  Epist.  6,  26,  51. 

^  Sozomen,  vi.  12. 

-  Socrat.  iv.  13,     Epiphan.  Hasr.  68. 

^  See  Canon  Bright's  learned  article  on  Athanasius,  in  Professor 
"SVace's  Dictionary  of  Christian  Biography,  i.  p.  202. 


24       Ecclesiastical  Miracles — Episcopate  of  Athanasiiis. 

15.  Much  has  been  recently  written  on  what  have 
been  called  Ecclesiastical  Miracles.*  The  "  luminous 
Cross  of  Constantine  ;"  the  "discovery  of  the  Cross  " 
by  his  mother  Helena  at  Jerusalem  ;  the  sudden 
death  of  Arius  at  Constantinople  on  the  eve  of  an 
expected  victory;  the  other  "luminous  Cross"  reaching 
from  Calvary  to  Olivet,  at  Whitsuntide,  in  the  time  of 
S.  Cyril ;  the  fiery  eruption  and  other  phenomena 
which  frustrated  the  Emperor  Julian's  attempt  to 
rebuild  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  ;  the  cures  said  to 
have  been  wrought  at  Milan  in  the  Episcopate  of  S. 
Ambrose  in  the  presence  of  the  relics  of  S.  Gervasius 
and  S.  Protasius  ; — these,  and  other  similar  events, 
have  been  made  subjects  of  controversy,  and  have 
been  minutely  scrutinized,  and  have  been  judged  in 
different  manners  by  persons  of  different  bias. 

But  perhaps  among  the  miracles  recorded  in  the 
history  of  the  fourth  century,  the  greatest  miracle  of 
all,  a  miracle  which  none  can  gainsay,  is  the  Episcopal 
life  of  Athanasius. 

That  Episcopal  life  was  extraordinary  in  its  circum- 
stances and  consequences.  It  was  continued  for 
nearly  fifty  years,  in  almost  every  one  of  which  it 
was  exposed  to  imminent  peril  from  powerful  enemies. 
It  was  productive  of  beneficial  effects  which  have 
endured  for  1500  years,  and  have  been  extended  to 
every  clime.  Some  may  be  content  with  calling  it 
providential  ;  be  it  so :  but  what  we  may  venture  to 
say  is,  that  it  has  no  parallel  of  a  similar  kind  in  the 
person  of  one  man  since  the  times  of  the  holy  Apos- 
tles ;  and  it  is  one  of  the  most  striking  evidences  of 

■*  E.g.  by  Cardinal  Newman,  in  his  translation  of  portions  of  the  Abbe 
Fleury's  Church  History  (1842)  ;  and  by  many  others. 


Episcopate  of  Athanasius.  25 

the  truth  of  Christ's  promise  that  the  gates  of  hell 
shall  never  prevail  against  His  Church. 

The  history  of  the  interval  between  the  Councils 
of  Nicaea  and  Constantinople  is  virtually  summed  up 
in  the  Episcopate  of  Athanasius.  He  is  the  central 
figure  in  it.  It  is  his  history.  He  was  a  personified 
Creed.  Many  who  were  Arians  at  heart,— even 
Arius  himself, — endeavoured  to  deceive  others  by 
professing  themselves  believers  in  the  Nicene  faith ; 
but  while  they  did  this,  they  associated  with  the 
enemies  and  accusers  of  Athanasius,  and  thus  they 
unmasked  themselves.  His  name  was  the  touchstone 
of  their  faith.  They  were  detected  by  it.  He  bore 
a  charmed  life.  To  outside  observers  he  seemed  to 
have  not  only  the  sagacity  of  a  politician  and  the 
shrewdness  of  a  lawyer,  but  the  supernatural  art  of  a 
Magician.^  The  rulers  of  the  world  set  a  price  on 
his  head.  Constantius  said  that  he  had  rather 
conquer  Athanasius,  than  triumph  over  his  deadliest 
foe.  Julian  ordered  his  death.^  Obadiah's  language 
concerning  Elijah  the  prophet  might  be  applied  to 
Athanasius,^  and  it  might  almost  be  added  that  when 
he  was  sought  for,  "  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  carried 
him"  whither  men  knew  not.  When  Syrianus  at- 
tacked his  Church  at  Alexandria  with  a  large  military 
force  on  the  night  of  Feb.  8,  A.D.  356,  he  sat  down 


*  The  heathen  historian  Ammianus  Marcellinus  says,  xv.  7,  **Dice- 
batur  (Athanasius)  fatidicarum  sortium  fidem,  quaeque  augurales 
portenderent  alites,  scientissime  callens,  aliquoties  prsedixisse  futura." 
The  story  that  he  used  the  dead  hand  of  Arsenius  for  magical  purposes 
is  significant.  Egypt,  and  especially  Alexandria,  was  famous  then,  as 
now,  for  its  adepts  in  witchcraft,  sorcery,  and  curious  arts.  As  to  his 
legal  ability,  see  Sulp.  Severus,  ii.  36, "  Athanasium/«mr^«x«//ww.'' 

^  Above,  p.  23,  note  9.     Rufin.  i.  34.    Theodoret,  iii.  5. 

'  I  Kings  xviii.  10. 


26  Episcopate  of  Athanasius, 

on  his  Episcopal  throne  and  ordered  the  Deacon  to 
read  a  Psalm  (the  136th),  and  the  people  to  respond 
"  for  His  mercy  endureth  for  ever.'''^  The  soldiers 
rushed  in  with  a  war-cry,  and  with  the  clashing  of 
arms ;  arrows  flew  and  swords  were  brandished. 
Some  of  the  people  were  trampled  down  on  the 
ground  and  wounded.  Athanasius  would  not  retire 
until  he  had  done  all  in  his  power  to  save  them  ;  and 
then  he  was  carried  away  by  the  Clergy,  and  glided 
unperceived  through  the  midst  of  his  enemies. 

Under  the  Emperor  Julian,  in  A.D.  363,  he  met  his 
pursuers  on  the  Nile,  as  they  came  from  Alexandria  ; 
they  accosted  him,  and  asked  for  Athanasius.  '*  He 
is  close  by  "  was  the  answer ;  and  he  quietly  passed 
by  them  and  entered  the  city,  where  he  remained  safe 
till  Julian's  death.^ 

Often  had  he  been  tracked  by  his  pursuers  among 
the  monasteries  of  Egypt,  but  he  was  marvellously 
preserved  from  them.  He  was  like  those  of  whom 
the  Apostle  writes,  "  they  wandered  in  deserts  and  in 
mountains,  and  in  dens  and  caves  of  the  earth."  ^  In 
the  forty-seven  years  of  his  Episcopate,  he  was  four 
times  driven  into  banishment ;  to  Treves  in  Gaul,  to 
Rome  and  other  cities  of  Italy,  to  Illyria,  into  the 
wilds  and  solitudes  of  the  desert  of  Egypt.  The 
time  of  these  four  banishments  amounted  on  the  whole 
to  about  twenty  years.  He  was  brought  before 
Councils  and  Kings  for  Christ's  sake.  He  was  in  perils 
by  sea  and  by  land,  in  the  city  and  in  the  wilderness, 
and  among  false  brethren.  He  was  deprived  of  all 
his  powerful  protectors  in  turn  :  first  of  Constantine, 
the  eldest  western  Emperor ;   then  of  Constans,  the 

8  Athanas.  Hist.  Arian.  §  31.  ^  Theodoret,  iii.  5. 

1  Heb.  xi.  38. 


Episcopate  of  Athanasius.  27 

youngest ;  then  of  his  faithful  and  loving  brother- 
Bishop,  Julius  of  Rome.  Constantius,  the  Emperor 
of  the  East,  having  persecuted  him  for  a  time,  relented 
and  confessed  his  innocence — like  Saul  persecuting 
David.  But  soon  afterwards  his  love  turned  into 
more  bitter  hate  ;  and  when  he  became  Emperor  of 
the  whole  Roman  world,  after  the  death  of  Constans 
his  brother,  he  persecuted  him  more  violently  than 
before. 

Athanasius  saw  all  the  greatest  Episcopal  Sees  of 
Christendom  occupied  successively  by  Arians,  some  of 
them  his  most  bitter  enemies :  his  own  See  of  Alex- 
andria by  the  two  Cappadocian  heresiarchs,  Gregory 
and  George ;  the  See  of  Antioch  held  by  six  heretical 
Bishops  in  succession,  the  last  two  being  the  notorious 
Leontius  and  Eudoxius  ;  the  See  of  Constantinople 
by  the  leader  of  the  Arian  faction,  Eusebius  of  Nico- 
media  ;  by  Macedonius,  the  enemy  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  the  author  of  the  heresy  which  denied  His 
Divinity  ;  and  by  the  arch-heretic,  Eudoxius,  and  by 
Demophilus  of  Beroea,  who  tempted  Liberius  to  his 
fall ;  the  See  of  Jerusalem  deprived  of  its  Bishop 
Cyril  by  Acacius,  the  heretical  Metropolitan  of 
Csesarea.  He  saw  the  Episcopal  Patriarch  of  Chris- 
tendom, the  venerable  champion  of  the  Nicene  faith, 
Hosius,  Bishop  of  Corduba,  renouncing  the  Creed 
which  he  had  framed,  and  accepting  in  its  place  the 
Arian  formula  of  Sirmium.  He  saw  Liberius,  Bishop 
of  Rome,  purchasing  his  return  from  banishment  by 
subscribing  an  Arian  formula,  and  a  condemnation  of 
Athanasius  himself.  Lastly,  he  saw  the  almost  uni- 
versal shipwreck  of  the  Catholic  Episcopate  in  the 
Council  of  Rimini. 

These   things   Athanasius  saw.      But  he  was  not 


2  8  Fruits  of  his  Episcopate—  his  theology. 

moved.  He  would  not  accept  one  of  the  numerous 
compromises  which  were  offered  him  by  flattery  or  by 
force  in  h'eu  of  the  Creed  of  Nicaea,which  declared  the 
Son  of  God  to  be  of  one  substance  with  the  Father. 
He  saw,  and  he  almost  alone  among  the  Bishops  of 
Christendom  saw — with  something  more  than  the 
keen  eye  of  a  clear  and  sagacious  logic — he  perceived 
by  the  grace  of  spiritual  illumination,  that  on  the 
maintenance  of  the  Nicene  doctrine  of  the  Godhead 
of  the  Son,  of  one  substance  with  the  Father,  de- 
pended the  doctrine  of  the  Godhead  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  also,  and  the  doctrine  of  the  Blessed  Trinity — 
three  divine,  co-equal,  co-eternal,  consubstantial  Per- 
sons and  one  God.  The  result  of  his  constancy  and 
courage  was,  that  in  the  next  century  after  Athanasius 
Arianism  was  extinct.  Augustine  could  then  say 
that  Arianism,  which  had  filled  the  world,  was  "  re- 
jected by  the  world,"  and  was  like  a  "  putrid  corpse.""  ^ 

The  Catholic  Church,  and  the  Spirit  of  God  dwelling 
in  the  Catholic  Church,  have  now  for  1500  years 
confirmed  the  judgment  of  Athanasius. 

His  earliest  theological  treatise — that  against  the 
Heathen,  in  which  he  uttered  that  noble  sentence, 
that  "polytheism  is  atheism  "  ^ — had  prepared  him  for 
his  conflict  with  Arianism,  which  destroyed  the  Unity 
of  the  Godhead,  and  led  logically  to  Polytheism,  and 
so  eventually  to  Atheism,  by  introducing  a  second 
inferior  Deity  in  the  person  of  the  Son,  and  another 
in  the  Holy  Ghost. 

Next,  his  treatise  on  the  Incarnation  shows  that  he 
had  fathomed  the  depths   of  that    doctrine,  and    of 

2  S.  Augustine,  vi.  p.  198  (ed.  Paris,  1836),  **  Ariani  toto  orbi  ab- 
jecti ;"  and  iii.  p.  2081,  "  Ariana  heeresis  similis  cadaveri  putrescend." 

3  Orat.  c.  (ient.  §  z^. 


His  firmness — and  conciliatory  spirit.  29 

Christ's  Godhead,  and  that  he  had  fully  realized  its 
bearincfs  on  the  whole  scheme  of  Divine  Grace  and 
human  redemption,*  and  had  qualified  him  to  en- 
counter with  success  the  heresy  which  impugned  those 
doctrines. 

Athanasius  argued  from  the  worship  of  the  Church 
that  Arianism  was  virtually  condemned  by  it.  "  It  is 
not  lawful  to  adore  a  creature  ;  and  it  is  not  only 
lawful  to  worship  God,  but  it  is  necessary  to  worship 
Him,  and  to  worship  Him  alone.  The  Catholic  Church 
adores  Christ ;  therefore  Christ  is  not  a  creature,  and 
must  be  God."^  His  theological  studies  as  a  Deacon 
bore  fruit  in  his  Episcopate. 

But  it  was  not  merely  the  learning,  courage,  and 
matchless  fortitude,  which  made  the  life  and  ministry 
of  Athanasius  a  worthy  subject  for  careful  meditation 
and  for  devout  study,  and  for  loving  thankfulness  to 
God  for  having  endued  him  with  those  virtues,  and 
which  render  it  exemplary  to  the  Church  in  every  age 
and  country ;  it  was  also  his  wisdom  and  patience, 
his  kindness  and  his  charity,  which  entitle  him  to 
admiration. 

S.  Gregory  Nazianzen  says  ^  that  Athanasius 
"  blended  the  properties  of  two  precious  stones,  and 
was  a  diamond  to  those  who  struck  him,  and  a 
magnet  to  those  who  differed  from  him."  Gregory  ^ 
refers  specially  to  his  conciliatory  spirit  and  love  of 
peace.  "  This  (says  he)  is  preferable  to  many  vigils, 
and  to  nights  spent  in  lying  on  the  ground,  which 
thincrs   terminate   with   those  who   use  them.     This 

o 

•*  See  above,  vol.  i.  p.  424,  and  on  its  relation  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
Christian  Sacraments,  ibid.  p.  428. 

5  See  Athanas.  Orat.  ii.  c.  Arian.  §  23,  §  24. 
^  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xxi.  §  31,  p.  406. 
7  Orat.  xxi.  §  36,  p.  410. 


30       Many-sidedness  of  his  character:  his  I'etirement  in 

persecution. 
peaceable  spirit  was  not  of  less  value  than  all  his 
banishments.  After  those  afflictions  he  devoted  him- 
self to  the  things  for  which  he  had  suffered  them.  He 
laboured  for  the  sake  of  others.  Some  he  praised, 
others  he  gently  reproved  ;  he  stimulated  the  slug- 
gishness of  some,  and  restrained  the  heat  of  others  ; 
he  prevented  some  from  falling,  and  raised  others 
who  had  fallen.  Simple  in  his  life,  multiform  in  his 
art  of  governing ;  wise  in  words,  wiser  in  mind  ;  walk- 
ing, as  it  were,  on  foot  with  the  lowly,  soaring  on 
high  with  the  lofty;  a  lover  of  strangers,  suppliant, 
an  averter  of  evils  ;  a  lover  of  the  married  and 
unmarried  ;  a  lover  of  peace ;  a  reconciler  of  enemies, 
an  escort  to  all  who  are  travelling  onward  from  earth 
to  heaven." 

There  was  no  fanaticism  in  his  heroism.  He  knew 
when  to  retire,  and  when  to  resist.  He  was  great  and 
noble  not  only  in  fight,  but  in  flight.  His  apology 
for  his  own  withdrawal  from  the  storm  ^  is  full  of 
wisdom.  His  replies  to  the  allegations  of  his  enemies 
who  drove  him  from  his  see  by  their  cruel  outrages 
at  Alexandria,  exhibit  specimens  of  that  readi- 
ness in  raillery  and  repartee  for  which  he  was 
famous.  "  They  charge  me  with  cowardice  in  flying  ; 
not  that  they  wish  me  well,  or  desire  me  to  be  a 
brave  man,  and  stand  my  ground  ;  but  because  they 
hope  that  through  fear  of  such  a  reproach,  I  may  remain 
where  I  am  and  may  fall  into  their  hands.  They  are 
not  ashamed  of  their  sanguinary  deeds,  but  they  grieve 
that  I  have  not  fallen  a  victim  to  them  ;  and  yet 
they  charge  me  with  pusillanimity,  forgetting  that  if 
it  is  a  bad  thing  to  fly,  it  is  still  worse  to  persecute."  ^ 

8  P.  253,  ed.  Bened.  1777, 

^  Apol.  pro  Fuga,  §  2  and  §  8. 


His  fairness,  equity,  aiidmodei'ation.  31 

S.  Augustine  well  refers  to  it^  "as  displaying  the 
special  conditions  under  which  such  flight  is  not  only- 
allowable,  but  laudable.  When  the  Emperor  Con- 
stantius  specially  sought  to  apprehend  him,  he  felt 
how  necessary  to  the  Church  his  own  life  was,  and 
he  left  others  in  charge  to  minister  to  his  flock,  which 
he  hoped  to  revisit  and  feed." 

His  forbearance  and  gentleness  were  beyond  all 
praise.  When  others,  his  best  friends  and  adherents, 
were  betrayed  into  passionate  invectives  and  vindictive 
reprisals  against  those  who  deserted  the  ranks  of 
orthodoxy,  S.  Athanasius  was  more  eager  to  make 
allowance  and  to  devise  excuses  for  them.  S.  Hilary, 
Bishop  of  Poictiers,  when  recording  the  fall  of  Libe- 
rius.  Bishop  of  Rome,  and  his  subscription  of  an  Arian 
formula,  and  his  condemnation  of  Athanasius,  could 
not  restrain  himself  from  exclaiming  with  vehement 
indignation,  "  Here  is  Arian  perfidy  !  Anathema  to 
thee,  O  Liberius  !  Twice  and  thrice  anathema,  O  pre- 
varicator Liberius,  to  thee  !  "  ^ 

But  Athanasius  wrote  ^  calmly  on  the  same  unhappy 
defection,  and  showed  more  pity  for  Liberius  than 
sorrow  for  himself,  who  was  deserted  and  condemned 
by  him.  And  in  the  same  loving  spirit  he  pleaded 
for  his  aged  friend  ^  Hosius,  Bishop  of  Corduba.  He 
regarded  his  act  of  desertion  as  due  rather  to  the 
sins  of  the  persecutor  who  forced  him  to  it,  than  to 
the  weakness  of  the  veteran  who  was  the  victim  of 
his  rage,  and  he  cast  a  veil  over  his  fault  with  the 
tenderness  of  filial  love. 

^  In  his  Epistle  to  Honoratus  on  flight  in  persecution,  S.  Aug.  Epist. 
228.     Probably  Athanasius  remembered  the  example  of  Cyprian. 
2  S.  Hilary,  Frag.  vi.  p.  678,  ed.  Bened. 
^  Ad  Monachos,  §  41,  §  42. 
4  Ibid.  §  42. 


32  Lucifertans  compared  with  Athanasius. 

In  a  similar  spirit  of  forbearance  he  dealt  with 
those  Bishops  who  had  lapsed  at  Rimini  from  the 
faith.  His  valiant  and  impetuous  friend  and  fellow- 
Confessor  Lucifer,  Bishop  of  Cagliari,  hastened  to 
Antioch  in  the  year  362  in  order  to  decide  the  ques- 
tion "  What  was  to  be  done  with  those  who  had  lapsed 
into  heresy  in  persecution  such  as  that  under  Con- 
stantius  ?  "  This  was  not  a  new  subject  for  inquiry. 
It  had  been  considered  in  the  days  of  Dionysius 
of  Alexandria  and  of  S.  Cyprian  in  the  third  cen- 
tury," and  at  the  Council  of  Nicaea. 

Lucifer  did  not  profit  by  the  experience  of  the 
past ;  he  allowed  himself  to  be  goaded  on  by  pas- 
sionate zeal  against  error,  rather  than  to  be  guided 
by  compassionate  love  for  the  erring.  He  would 
not  re-admit  to  Communion  any  of  those  who  had 
lapsed  at  Rimini  ;  he  disallowed  and  branded  their 
ministrations  with  the  stigma  of  infamy,  and  thus 
he  brought  disgrace  on  himself  by  giving  his  name 
to  a  schism. 

But  S.  Athanasius,  with  the  Council  of  Alexandria 
under  his  presidency,  followed  a  different  course,  and 
received  those  into  Communion  who  had  been  sur- 
prised into  error  by  fraud,  or  compelled  by  violence, 
on  the  condition  of  their  renouncing  the  error  and 
confessing  the  true  faith.^ 

Here  also  we  may  recognize  another  cause  for 
thankfulness  to  the  Great  Head  of  the  Church,  Who 
brings  good  out  of  evil,  and  overrules  evil  for  good. 
Athanasius  alter  Rimini  instructs  us  as  well  as  at 
Nicaea. 

5  See  above,  vol.  i.  pp.  313,  317,  321,  455  of  the  present  work. 

6  S.  Athanas.  Epist.  ad  Rufinianum,  p.  768.     S.  Hieron.  c.  Lucifer, 
c.  7. 


His  bam'shments — their  providential  uses.  ^^ 

i6.  The  duration  of  his  four  banishments,  as  has 
been  said,  amounted  on  the  whole  to  about  twenty 
years. 

But  in  them  also  was  a  providential  dispensation. 

They  were  like  the  imprisonments  of  St.  Paul, 
which  produced  the  Apostolic  Epistles.  They  gave 
him  leisure  to  write  ;  not  only  to  compose  theological 
treatises  for  the  instruction  of  every  age  of  the  Church, 
but  they  gave  him  ample  time  also  to  compose  his 
historical  works.  The  Church  would  probably  have 
known  little  of  her  own  existence  in  that  eventful 
period,  if  she  had  not  possessed  the  historical  writings 
of  Athanasius. 

Eusebius,  the  Church  historian,  though  he  lived  for 
about  fifteen  years  after  the  Council  of  Nicsea,  con- 
tributes scarcely  anything  to  the  internal  history  of 
that  period.  He  was  dazzled  by  the  imperial  splen- 
dour of  Constantine,  whose  life  he  writes,  and  seems  not 
to  have  much  discernment  for  other  persons  or  things. 

Those  historical  works  of  Athanasius — his  Apologia 
to  the  Emperor  Constantius,  and  on  his  own  flight 
from  Alexandria  ;  his  Epistle  to  Serapion  on  the 
death  of  Arius  ;  his  history  of  the  Arians  addressed 
to  the  Monks  ;  his  Epistle  to  the  African  Bishops ; 
his  Epistles  on  the  decrees  of  Nicsea,  and  on  the 
Synods  of  Ariminum  and  Seleucia — contain  not  only 
narratives  of  the  principal  events  of  the  times,  but 
the  most  important  documents  of  Councils  and 
Cabinets,  and  are  of  more  value  than  all  the  his- 
tories of  the  period  ;  and  without  them  the  historical 
works  of  Theodoret,  Socrates,  and  Sozomen,  writing 
in  the  fifth  century,  could  never  have  been  composed. 

It  has  been  alleged,  indeed,^  that  the  reader  is  too 

^  By  Gdbbon,  ch.  xxi.  p.  362. 
VOL.    II.  D 


34  At  ha  nasi  us  as  an  historian, 

favourably  biassed  on  the  side  of  Athanasius  on  this 
account  He  is  himself  the  historian  of  his  own  times, 
and  we  have  only  the  fragmentary  remains  of  Philo- 
storgius  to  represent  the  side  of  Arianism.  But  it 
must  be  remembered  that  Athanasius,  with  a  wise 
foresight,  has  taken  care  to  guard  himself  against  im- 
putations of  partiality,  and  to  corroborate  his  own 
historical  narrative  by  public  documents  {pieces justi- 
ficatives),  such  as  Imperial  Rescripts,  Episcopal  Letters, 
and  Synodical  Decrees.  Also,  Eusebius,  who  wrote 
the  life  of  Constantine  after  the  accession  of  Constan- 
tius,  and  was  not  friendly  to  Athanasius,  never  breathes 
a  syllable  against  him.  And  Theodoret,  Socrates, 
and  Sozomen  were  learned  and  good  men,  and  wrote 
when  party-spirit  had  subsided. 

Athanasius  is  therefore  justly  regarded,  not  only  as 
the  Great  Theologian,  but  the  principal  Historian,  of 
the  Church  after  Eusebius ;  and  this  was  mainly  due 
to  his  banishments,  which  gave  him  time  to  write  what 
he  did. 

It  is  well  said  by  the  learned  Benedictine  Mont- 
faucon,^  the  editor  of  his  works,  that  "  Athanasius  is 
greatly  to  be  preferred  to  all  historians  of  his  time, 
inasmuch  as  he  was  an  eye-witness  of  what  he  relates, 
and  narrates  events  most  accurately,  and  often  adduces 
the  official  documents,  which  are  irrefragable  ;  whereas 
other  writers  of  that  history,  such  as  Ruffinus,  Socrates, 
Sozomen,  and  Theodoret,  are  to  be  used  with  the 
greatest  caution,  inasmuch  as  they  often  affirm  what 
is  uncertain,  and  frequently  confound  events,  and  mix 
them  up  without  any  chronological  order." 

1 7.  Nor  was  this  all.  As  has  been  already  noticed," 
the  early  Church  of  Rome  was  not  strong  in  theology. 

«  Tref.  to  Ath.  Apol,  p.  96.  »  Vol.  i.  p.  290. 


Athanasius  the  teacher  of  the  JVest,  as  well  as  oj  the  East,  35 

But  Alexandria  was  more  fortunate.  Her  Catecheti- 
cal School  had  many  learned  teachers  and  scholars. 
The  '*  Throne  of  St.  Mark  "  at  Alexandria  had  been 
occupied  by  great  divines.  Athanasius  by  hereditary 
descent  was  pointed  out  for  the  Teacher  of  the 
Church.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  he  was  the 
greatest  master  of  theology  as  a  science  that  the  world 
has  seen  since  the  days  of  the  Apostles. 

It  was  a  happy  thing  for  the  West  that  Athanasius 
was  brought  by  his  banishment  into  the  cities  of  Italy 
and  Gaul, — Rome,  Milan,  Aquileia,  and  Treves. 

His  sojourn  in  those  cities  rescued  the  West  from 
Arianism.  The  Emperors  of  the  West,  Constantine 
the  Second,  and  Constans,  his  younger  brother,  were 
strengthened  by  Athanasius  in  the  faith,  and  showed 
their  gratitude  to  him.  And  the  Western  Bishops, 
Julius  and  Liberius  of  Rome,  Eusebius  of  Vercellse, 
Hilary  of  Poictiers,  Lucifer  of  Cagliari,  and  the  Bishops 
assembled  at  Sardica  in  a.d.  344,  were  strengthened 
by  his  presence  and  counsel. 

It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  the  spirit  of  Athana- 
sius reproduced  itself  not  only  in  the  East,  in  the 
Episcopate  of  S.  Basil  at  Caesarea  (especially  in  his 
bold  resistance  to  Valens,  the  Arian  persecutor)  and 
in  the  lives  and  acts  of  Gregory  Nazianzen  and  Gre- 
gory of  Nyssa  ;  but  also  animated  S.  Ambrose  at 
Milan  in  his  defence  of  the  Catholic  faith  in  the 
West  against  Valentinian  the  Second,  and  his  Arian 
mother  Justina. 

18.  A  superficial  reader  of  this  portion  of  Church 
History,  as  related  in  the  pages  of  Theodoret,  Sozo- 
men,  and  Socrates,  and  of  some  modern  historians 
may  probably  be  distracted  by  it.  Acts  of  imperial 
tyranny  and  caprice,  strifes  of  Bishops  with  Bishops 

D  2 


36  Quiet  teachings  of  troubled  times. 

and  Councils  against  Councils,  in  an  ever-varying  suc- 
cession of  formularies  of  faith ;  malignity,  injustice, 
and  treachery  in  the  Church  of  God  ; — these,  and  such 
things  as  these,  may  perplex  and  stagger  him,  and  he 
may  turn  away  from  such  a  scene  of  confusion  with 
weariness  and  distress. 

But  not  so  the  thoughtful  student.  The  contem- 
plation of  the  long  and  cruel  sufferings  of  one  of  the 
world's  greatest  heroes  and  benefactors — such  Atha- 
nasius  was — and  his  final  and  glorious  victory,  and  that 
of  his  cause,  will  silence  all  querulous  repining  in  the 
worst  times  of  the  Church,  and  will  be  fraught  with 
instruction  and  encouragement. 

It  will  teach  patient  endurance  ;  it  will  show  that 
they  who  would  be  faithful  witnesses  of  God  and  His 
truth,  must  not  look  nor  wish  for  contemporary 
praise  ;  but  must  rather  expect  to  be  misunderstood 
and  misrepresented  by  their  own  age  ;  and  it  will 
inspire  hope  and  trust  in  the  future  triumph  of  the 
Church. 

The  manifold  variations  of  Arian  Creeds,  and  their 
ultimate  downfall,  may  serve  to  show  that  there 
is  no  safe  standing-ground  for  those  who  do  not 
receive  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  Godhead  as  taught  by 
Athanasius. 

The  resort  of  the  Arians  to  the  Civil  power  in  their 
struggles,  and  their  distrust  of  genuine  Church  Synods, 
will  also  not  be  without  use  in  these  latter  days. 

19.  Even  the  bitter  strifes  of  the  time,  and  the  eager 
and  pertinacious  hostility  of  his  persecutors,  will  not 
be  unprofitable,  as  showing  that  the  question  at  issue 
was  regarded  by  both  sides  as  one  of  paramount 
importance. 


Orthodoxy  in  sojne  things  of  some  who  were  otherwise  37 
heterodox,  an  evidence  of  truth. 
And  in  the  present  day  it  will  be  well  to  remember 
that  there  was  no  difference  between  these  contend- 
ing parties  on  other  matters  of  vital  importance. 
Arians  no  less  than  Athanasians  were  agreed  in  the 
belief  of  the  Truth  and  Inspiration  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures ;  and  they  had  the  same  Canon  of  Scripture;^ 
they  received  it  as  God's  Word,  and  appealed  to  it 
as  such.  They  were  of  one  mind  as  to  the  need  of 
Sacraments.  They  were  all  united  in  recognizing 
the  three  Orders  of  Ministers  in  the  Church. 

They  were  zealous  in  the  building  of  Christian 
Churches,'  and  for  Christian  Missions ;  they  were 
neither  Gnostics  nor  Agnostics;  and  we  may  well 
believe  that  if  they  had  seen  what  the  Church  now 
sees,  namely,  the  universal  reception  of  the  Nicene 
Creed,  they  would  not  have  been  Arians. 

Let  us  not  judge  the  partisans  of  Arianism  too 
harshly.  There  were  good  and  pious  men  among 
them,  who  were  unconscious  Arians ;  much  allowance 
is  to  be  made  for  the  fervour  of  the  Greek  and  Asiatic 
temperament ;  and,  if  we  may  so  speak,  the  slough  of 
heathenism  had  not  been  yet  cast  off  from  many 
among  them.  They  had  been  familiar  with  acts  of 
violence  and  bloodshed  ;  and  the  Spirit  of  gentleness 
and  meekness  had  settled  in  the  minds  of  few  among 
the  leaders  on  either  side  of  the  controversy. 

If  also  we  are  perplexed  not  only  by  the  cruelties 
but  by  the  calumnies  of  the  enemies  of  Athanasius, 

1  The  Council  of  Laodicea  (a.d.  363?),  which  is  of  primary  authority 
as  to  the  Canon  of  Scripture,  was  probably  a  SemiArian  Synod  ;  see 
below,  ch.  vi.  The  Council  of  Antioch,  A.d.  341,  which  framed  many 
important  decrees,  received  by  the  Universal  Church,  contained  also 
many  Arian  Bishops. 

2  Several  of  the  Arian  Creeds  were  connected  with  the  dedication  of 
Churches  at  Jerusalem  and  Antioch. 


3  8    Lessons  taught  by  failure  of  Bishops — Roman  hifallibility 

and  Presbyteriati  ordinations. 
let  us  remember  that  a  love  of  truth  was  almost  the 
hardest  lesson  for  Greeks  and  Asiatics  to  learn. 

20.  Even  the  failure  of  great  Bishops  of  the  Church 
at  that  time  has  also  its  instruction  for  us. 

The  fall  of  Hosius  may  remind  us  that  the  greatest 
of  saints  are  not  a  rule  of  life.  Only  the  Divine 
Head  of  the  Church,  speaking  in  His  Holy  Word,  as 
interpreted  by  the  Spirit  in  the  Church  Universal,  is 
the  Guide  of  Faith. 

The  fall  of  Liberius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  from  ortho- 
doxy into  Arianism,  and  into  a  condemnation  of 
Athanasius,  might,  if  duly  pondered  in  the  present 
age,  have  saved  the  Church  of  Rome  from  the  here- 
tical Vatican  Decree— of  July  1 8th,  1870— affirming 
the  Infallibility  of  the  Roman  Pontiff;  and  it  may  save 
some  among  us  from  building  their  faith  on  that 
quicksand. 

Even  the  accusation  brought  against  Athanasius 
in  the  matter  of  Ischyras,  ordained  by  CoUuthus,^ 
may  remind  the  student  of  Church  History,  that 
(where  Bishops  exist)  Presbyterian  Ordinations  re- 
ceived no  sanction  from  Athanasius  and  the  ancient 
Catholic  Church  ;  and  that  Ordinations  by  those  who 
have  not  been  ordained  even  by  Presbyters  would 
have  been  strongly  condemned  by  them. 

21.  Once  more,  it  will  be  profitable  to  consider 
what  was  the  source  of  the  strength  of  Athanasius. 
It  was  his  continual  communion  with  God  especially 
in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  S.  Gregory  Nazianzen  says  '* 
that  Athanasius  knew  more  of  both  Testaments  than 
other  persons  knew  of  one.  His  love,  and  daily 
study  of  God's  Word  and  of  the  Psalter  especially, 
was  an  inexhaustible  well-spring  to  him  of  divine 

*  See  above,  vol.  i.  p.  447.  "*  Orat.  xxi.  §  6. 


Sources  of  strength  in  Athanasiiis.  39 

grace.  In  the  midst  of  the  storm  that  raged  in  the 
Church  at  Alexandria^  during  the  sacrilegious  and 
cruel  outrages  perpetrated  there  by  the  Cappadocian 
heresiarch,  the  schismatical  Bishop  George,'  and  his 
accomplices,  he  quietly  remained  in  his  Episcopal 
throne,  and  ordered  the  Deacon  and  people  to  sing 
the  136th  Psalm,  "His  mercy  endureth  for  ever." 
"  I  hear  (says  he,  in  his  letter  to  his  friend  Marcel- 
linus  ^)  that  you  devote  yourself  to  the  study  of  all 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  particularly  of  the  Psalms.  I 
greatly  praise  ycu  for  this ;  my  earnest  desire 
is  toward  that  Book,  as  also  toward  the  rest  of 
Scripture." 

That  he  communed  constantly  with  God  in  prayer 
and  meditation,  and  in  his  Holy  Sacraments,  we  know, 
and  with  what  spiritual  delight,  when  wearied  with 
toil  and  harassed  by  persecution,  he  resorted  to  the 
quiet  retreats  of  those  holy  men  who  lived  a  life  of 
devotion  in  the  monastic  solitudes  of  Nitria  and 
Upper  Egypt.^  It  was  also  his  spirit  of  modesty 
and  meekness,  deeming  lightly  of  himself  and  his 
own  powers,  and  hardly  conscious  of  their  existence, 
which  made  him  more  desirous  of  divine  grace,  and 
better   qualified   to    receive   it.^      He  united   child- 

5  Ath.  Apol.  ad  Const.  §  23  ;  Apol.  de  Fuga,  §  24 ;  ad  Monachos, 
§81. 

^  See  his  Epistle  to  Marcellinus,  p.  784.  Some  extracts  from  it  are 
given  in  my  Introduction  to  the  Psalms,  p.  iii  and  p.  xiv.  S.  Augustine 
says  that  he  required  the  Psalms  to  be  recited  to  him  rather  than 
sung.     Confessions,  x.  33. 

7  See  above,  vol.  i.  pp.  430—434,  on  his  connexion  with  the  hermit 
S.  Antony. 

^  See,  for  example,  his  Epistle  prefixed  to  his  History  of  the  Arians 
(p.  272,  ed.  Ben.  1777),  after  some  theological  utterances  concerning  the 
divine  nature,  and  as  an  introduction  to  what  he  had  written  on  the 
subject : — 

"Thus  have  I  written  according  to  my  ability  ;  but  accept  it,  not  as 


40  Lessons  of  humility  a?id  of  self-reproach. 

like  simplicity  and  playful  cheerfulness^  with  philo- 
sophic wisdom,  theological  science,  political  sagacity, 
saintly  piety,  and  heroic  magnanimity. 

22.  In  fine,  this  portion  of  Church  History  may 
teach  Churchmen  of  the  present  age  the  wholesome 
lesson  of  humility.  By  setting  before  us  the  example 
of  Athanasius,  it  may  make  us  ashamed  of  our  self- 
indulgences,  and  of  our  compromises  of  vital  truths 
for  ease  and  popularity.  It  may  make  us  feel  our 
own  littleness  and  shortcomings  in  the  presence  of 
so  grand  an  example,  and  it  may  show  us  where  true 
strength  is  to  be  found — not  in  ourselves,  but  in  Him 
Whose  we  are. 

The  history  of  the  Ante-Nicene  age  is  the  history 
of  the  World  against  the  Church  ;  the  history  of  the 
Post-Nicene  age  is  the  history  of  the  World  in  the 
Church.  The  former  history  has  already  manifested 
to  us  that  the  World  is  powerless  against  the  Church 
of  Christ,  and  led  her  on  to  glorious  victories  when  she 
looked  upward  to  her  Divine  Head  for  help  and  guid- 
ance, and  relied  on  Him.  And  the  history  now  before 
us  will  show,  that  although  the  World  working  in  the 
Church  is  more  to  be  dreaded  than  the  World  acting 
against  her  ;  yet  it  is  also  equally  powerless,  and  will 
lead  her  on  to  no  less  illustrious  triumphs,  if  the 
World  be  resisted  and  encountered  by  those  Christian 
virtues  and  graces  which  shone  so  brightly  in  Atha- 

a  perfect  explanation  of  the  Godhead  of  the  Word,  but  as  a  help  for  the 
refutation  of  error,  and  for  the  reception  of  truth  ;  and  if  I  have  omitted 
anything  (and  indeed  I  fear  that  everything  has  been  omitted  by  me), 
pardon  me,  I  pray  you,  and  accept  my  bold  endeavour  for  piety,  and 
when  you  have  read  it  pray  for  me,  and  exhort  one  another  to  do  so  ; 
and  send  me  back  what  I  have  written  ;  and  do  not  take  a  copy,  nor 
allow  any  one  to  do  so.  For  it  is  not  safe  for  the  writings  of  one  who 
is  like  a  lisping  babe,  and  unlearned  as  I  am,  to  go  down  to  posterity." 
He  uses  similar  language  of  humility  in  his  letter  to  Serapion,  p.  271. 


Trust  for  the  future.  4 1 

nasius.  Above  all,  the  reader  will  feel  assured,  that 
Christ,  Who  strengthened  and  comforted  Athanasius 
in  his  labours  and  sufferings  for  forty-seven  years,  will 
never  fail  those  who  believe,  love,  and  obey  Him,  and 
that  His  promise  to  His  children  is  ever  true,  "  Lo, 
I  am  with  you  alway,  even  to  the  end  of  the  world." 

Let  us  now  proceed  to  the  history. 


CHAPTER  II. 

From  the  Council  of  Niccza^  A.D.  325,  and  the  con- 
secration of  AthanasiiiSj  to  the  death  of  the 
Emperor  Constantine,  May  22,  A.D.  337. 

Not  quite  five  months  after  the  Council  of  Nicaea, 
the  See  of  Alexandria  became  vacant  by  the  decease 
of  its  Bishop,  Alexander.^ 

On  his  death-bed  he  was  asked  to  name  his  suc- 
cessor. "  Athanasius  "  was  the  reply.  Athanasius 
himself  was  not  present,  but  another  person  bearing 
that  name  was,  who  answered  to  the  call. 

But  the  aged  Bishop  took  no  heed  of  him,  and  re- 
peated the  name  "  Athanasius  "  several  times.  "  O 
Athanasius,"  rejoined  the  dying  Prelate,  "thou 
th'inkest  to  escape  by  flight,  but  thou  wilt  not  be  able 
to  do  so."  ^ 

The  date  of  his  consecration  is  not  quite  certain.^ 
It  was  probably  in  the  summer  of  A.D.  326.  The 
Bishops  who  assembled  at  Alexandria  were  not 
unanimous  ;  but  the  acclamations  of  the  people  pre- 

1  Athan.  Apol.  c.  Arian.  §  59. 

2  Sozomen,  ii,  17. 

3  According  to  the  Festal  Letters  published  in  1848  by  the  late  Canon 
Cureton  from  a  Syriac  Version  found  at  Nitria,  his  first  Pastoral  Epistle 
was  published  A.D.  329,  and  this  has  led  some  (De  Broglie,  Hist,  de 
I'Eglise,  ii.  287)  to  place  his  consecration  in  A.D.  328.  But  this  is 
doubtful;  cp.  Canon  Bright  (Wace,  Diet.  p.  182).  On  the  Festal 
Epistles  (or  Easter  Pastorals),  see  Montfaucon,  Praef.  ad  Athanas.  p.  xxiv. 


Missionary  Work — Abyssinia — the  Goths.  43 

vailed,  and  Athanasius  was  consecrated  to  the  vacant 
see.* 

Four  years  passed  away  in  peace.  Some  of  his 
earliest  acts  were  of  a  missionary  character.  The 
Episcopate  of  Abyssinia — which  has  been  preserved 
to  the  present  day — owes  its  origin  to  him. 

Perhaps  some  preparations  had  been  made  in 
Apostolic  times  for  the  reception  of  the  Gospel  there 
by  the  conversion  of  the  Treasurer  of  Candace,  Queen 
of  Ethiopia,  by  Philip  the  Evangelist.^  Frumentius, 
a  Christian  of  Tyre,  and  his  brother  ^desius,  were 
taken  prisoners,  and  were  brought  to  the  king,  whose 
favour  they  obtained,  and  were  advanced  to  high 
places  in  the  realm.  Frumentius  came  to  Alexandria, 
and  reported  to  Athanasius  the  success  of  his  endea- 
vours to  spread  the  Gospel  in  that  country  ;  he  was 
consecrated  by  Athanasius,  and  sent  back  to  build  up 
the  Church,  of  which  he  had  laid  the  foundation.^ 

Another  example  of  the  working  of  divine  Pro- 
vidence, overruling  the  evils  of  War  and  Slavery  for 
the  spreading  of  Christianity,  was  seen  in  the  history 
of  the  Goths  making  inroads  into  the  territory  of  the 
Roman  Empire,  and  carrying  away  as  prisoners  many 
Christians,  both  lay  and  clerical,  by  whose  agency  the 
Gospel  was  propagated  among  the  Gothic  and  Ger- 
manic  tribes.'''     The    celebrated     Ulphilas   (a   name 

*  Epist.  Synod,  in  Apol.  c.  Arian.  §  6.  Sozomen,  ii.  17.  Epiphan. 
Hser.  68. 

*  Acts  viii.  27. 

^  Rufin.  i.  9.  Theodoret,  i.  23,  Socr,  i.  19.  Sozomen,  ii.  24.  The 
Eastern  Church  honours  his  memory  on  Nov.  30,  the  Western  on 
Oct.  27. 

"  Philostorg.  ii.  5.  Among  the  subscriptions  to  the  Council  of 
Nicsea  is  that  of  Theophilus,  *'  Bishop  of  the  Goths."  The  simpHcity 
and  purity  of  manners  among  the  Gothic  tribes,  as  contrasted  with  the 
Romans,  is  described  in  striking  language  by  Salvian,  De  Gubernatione 


44        Missions  in  Palestine  and  Persia —  Copies  of  the 

Scriptures —  Churches. 
Latinized  from  the  Germanic  Wolf),  Bishop  of  the 
Goths  (whose  acts  will  be  described  more  fully 
hereafter  in  the  history  of  the  Emperor  Valens^), 
is  said  to  have  held  that  position  as  early  as  the 
reign  of  Constantine,^  and  to  have  been  at  that  time 
a  believer  and  teacher  of  the  faith  as  professed  in  the 
Creed  of  Nicaea. 

Other  missionary  enterprises  were  undertaken  at 
the  same  time.  Christianity  was  propagated  in 
Gaza  and  other  cities  of  southern  Palestine,  and  in 
the  Phoenician  towns  of  the  north.^ 

Constantine  is  also  entitled  to  the  honour  of  pro- 
moting these  missions.  He  extended  his  religious 
zeal  to  Persia,  and  wrote  a  letter  to  Sapor,  king  of 
that  country  ;  in  which  he  declared  the  benefits  he 
himself  had  received  from  Christ,  and  he  exhorted 
him  to  accept  the  Gospel,^  and  to  encourage  those 
who  believed  it. 

The  pious  zeal  of  Constantine  was  also  happily 
exercised  in  the  multiplication  of  copies  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  and  in  the  building  of  Churches. 

At  the  present  day,  among  the  treasures  of  impe- 
rial, royal,  and  ecclesiastical   Libraries,  a  single  Greek 

Dei,  vii.  ii,  23  :  "Jam  apud  Gothos  impudici  non  sunt  nisi  Romani. 
Quae  Romano  statui  spes  esse  potest,  quando  castiores  barbari  quam 
Romani  sunt?  Nos  morum  nostromm  vitia  vicerunt."  Christianity 
with  its  vigorous  freshness  seems  to  have  worked  wonders  on  these 
Gothic  neophytes,  and  in  this  change  much  was  due  to  the  zeal  of 
Ulphilas.  Cp.  Baur,  Kirchen-Geschichte,  ii.  p.  13,  and  the  works  of 
Kraft,  Rettberg,  and  Giesebrecht,  cited  by  him. 

8  Below,  chap.  vii. 

8  Philostorg.  ii.  5.  Socr.  ii.  41.  It  has  been  supposed  by  some  (e.g. 
Abp.  Trench,  Study  of  Words,  p.  130)  that  the  Greek  origin  of  the  word 
Kirk,  Church,  &c. ,  is  to  be  ascribed  to  the  influence  of  the  Easterns  on 
the  Goths,  and  through  them  on  the  German  tribes. 

1  Euseb.  Vit.  Const,  iv.  37 — 39.      Socr.  i.  18. 

2  Euseb.  Vit.  Const,  iv.  8—13. 


Uncial  Manuscripts — New  Chu7'ches.  45 

Codex  of  the  Bible  is  justly  regarded  as  most  pre- 
cious ;  such  as  the  Sinaitic  Manuscript  in  the  posses- 
sion of  the  Emperor  of  Russia,  and  the  Codex  Alex- 
andrinus  given  by  a  Patriarch  of  Constantinople, 
Cyril  Lucar,  to  our  own  King  Charles  the  First,  and 
now  in  the  British  Museum  ;  and  the  Codex  Vaticanus 
in  the  Pontifical  Library  at  Rome.  None  of  these 
are  more  ancient  than  the  fourth  century.  And  in  the 
first  half  of  that  century  Constantine  ordered  Euse- 
bius,^  Bishop  of  Caesarea,  at  one  and  the  same  time 
to  provide  at  the  charge  of  the  imperial  exchequer, 
and  to  send  to  him  by  two  public  carriages,  not 
less  than  fifty  copies  of  the  Scriptures,  on  parchment, 
in  large  legible  character,  that  is,  in  what  we  call 
"  uncial  letters."  These  were  written  under  the  eye 
of  Eusebius  in  terfiions  and  quaternions^  and  were 
sent  by  him  to  the  Emperor  for  public  use  in  the 
Churches  built  by  him  at  Constantinople  alone. 
Constantine's  example  in  this  respect  was  imitated 
by  his  son  Constans,  who  desired  Athanasius  to  send 
him  from  Alexandria  some  manuscripts  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures.^ 

Constantine  was  a  munificent  builder  of  Churches  ; 
at  Constantinople,  Nicomedia,  Antloch,  and  Rome ; 
at  Ostia,  at  Capua,^  and  in  other  great  cities  of  the 
Empire.  He  also  promoted  the  moral  welfare  of  his 
subjects,  by  destroying  those  temples  where  the  most 

'  Euseb.  Vit.  Const,  iv.  36,  37. 

^  So  that  each  temion  had  twelve  columns,  and  each  quaternion 
sixteen—  according  to  Valesius,  ibid. 

*  Apol.  ad  Const.  §  4.  Montfaucon,  Vit.  Ath.  p.  xxxvii.  It  would 
be  an  interesting  subject  for  inquiry  how  far  these  two  consignments  of 
Uncial  Manuscripts  influenced  the  Eastern  and  Western  Recensions, 
which  are  analyzed  in  the  learned  remarks  of  Canon  Westcott  and  Dr. 
Hort  in  their  edition  of  the  Greek  Testament,  1881. 

*  Euseb.  ibid.  iii.  47,  50.    Anastas.  Bibl.  in  Fleury,  iii.  166. 


46       Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre — Hele7ia — the  Cross. 

licentious  impurities  were  practised  and  consecrated 
in  the  name,  and  on  the  plea,  of  religious  worship^ 
He  erected  Christian  Churches  on  the  sites  of  some 
of  them,  such  as  the  temple  of  Venus  at  Jerusalem, 
which  profaned  the  Holy  Sepulchre  itself. 

Constantine  also  liberally  supplied  funds  to  his 
mother  Helena  for  the  execution  of  her  pious  works 
in  the  Holy  Land  ;  ^  at  Jerusalem,  on  the  Mount  of 
Olives,  and  at  Bethlehem ;  and  for  the  work  ol  his 
mother-in-law  Eutropia  (the  mother  of  Fausta)  at 
the  Oak  of  Mamre,  near  Hebron. ^ 

The  visit  of  Helena  to  the  Holy  Land  was  proba- 
bly in  A.D.  327.  Jerusalem  was  its  principal  object ; 
and  at  Jerusalem  the  Holy  Sepulchre.  But  the 
tradition  of  its  site  was  obscure  and  uncertain.  The 
Christians  did  not  visit  a  place  which — as  already 
stated — was  occupied  by  the  Temple  of  Venus,  and 
polluted  by  lewd  idolaters.  However,  she  was  led  by 
various  motives  ^  to  destroy  that  temple,  and  to  clear 
away  the  rubbish  from  beneath  it  ;  and  it  is  related 
that  the  grotto  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  was  then  re- 
vealed to  view.  "  Behold,"  she  said,  "  the  place  of  the 
conflict ;  but  where  is  the  trophy  of  the  victory } "  ^ 
It  is  said  that  three  crosses^  of  wood  were  found. 
But  which  was  the  Cross  on  which  the  Saviour  had 
died .?  Some  afhrm  that  a  trilinguar  inscription  on 
one  of  them,  which  was  in  the  middle  between  the 
other   two,   could   still   be    deciphered,   and  that    it 


^  Euseb.  iii.  54—58.     Socr.  i.  18.     Sozomen,  ii.  5. 
*  Euseb.  iii.  25 — 45.     Theodoret,  i.  16  and  17. 
^  Vales,  on  Euseb.  iii.  51 — 53.     Sozomen,  ii.  4. 
^  See  Sozomen,  ii.  i. 

2  S.  Ambrose  de  obitu  Theodosii,  §  43 — §  48. 

3  Sozomen,  ii.  i.     Socrates,  i.  17.     Theodoret,  i. 


"  Inve?itio7i  of  the  Cross  " — the  Holy  Sepulchre.       47 

settled  that  question."  Others  relate  that  the  title 
was  found  separately  ;  ^  and  they  add  that  the  identifi- 
cation was  tested  on  the  suggestion  of  the  Bishop  of 
Jerusalem,  Macarius,  and  was  verified  by  the  per- 
formance of  a  miraculous  cure.^ 

Eusebius,  the  Church  historian  and  biographer  of 
Constantine,  agrees  with  other  historians  in  relating 
that  the  Holy  Sepulchre  was  discovered.  But  he 
ascribes  the  discovery  to  Constantine,  and  says 
nothing  of  the  finding  of  the  Cross. 

As  to  the  former  of  these  assertions,  it  may  be 
easily  reconciled  with  the  other  narratives.  What 
Helena,  the  mother  of  Constantine,  did,  was  done  by 
the  authority  and  with  the  resources  of  the  Emperor, 
her  son.  But  the  silence  of  Eusebius  as  to  the  latter 
casts  a  shadow  of  doubt  upon  it,  which  is  increased  by 
the  marvellous  uses  to  which  some  of  the  nails  of 
the  Cross  are  said  to  have  been  applied — namely, 
to  adorn  the  Emperor's  helmet,  and  the  bit  of  his 
horse.^ 

On  the  whole,  whatever  opinion  may  be  formed  as 
to  the  "  invention  of  the  Cross  I'  the  argument  which 
is  alleged  against  it,  the  silence  of  Eusebius,  confirms 
the  belief  in  the  discovery  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  itself, 
which  Eusebius  (writing  within  a  few  years  of  the 
event),  concurrently  with  the  other  Church  Historians, 
affirms  to  have  been  laid  open  to  the  light.  And  the 
fact  that  the  spot  had  been  chosen  by  the  heathen  as 
a  site  of  a  temple  of  pagan  and  impure  worship  in 
derision  and  contempt  of  Christianity,  may  perhaps 

■*  S.  Ambrose,  ibid.     S.  Chrysostom,  84,  in  S.  Joannem. 
5  Socrates,  Sozomen,  1.  c.  6  See  Theodoret,  i.  17. 

"  Theodoret,  i.  17.  Sozomen,  ii.  i.  Socr.  ii.  17.  Perhaps  there  was 
an  illusion  to  the  prophecy  in  Zech.  xiv.  20. 


48  The  Empress  Hele7ia — Olivet — Bethlehem. 

seem  to  corroborate  the  opinion  that  it  had  been 
specially  venerated  by  Christians.^  This  at  least  is 
certain,  that  (whether  their  opinion  was  correct  or  no) 
the  Christians  of  the  fourth  and  following  centuries 
agreed  in  believing  that  the  site  of  the  Holy  Sepul- 
chre had  been  found  by  Helena,  mother  of  Constan- 
tine. 

Eusebius  also  affirms  ^  that  Helena  built  two 
Churches  in  Palestine,  one  on  the  Mountain  of  the  As- 
cension, the  other  in  the  grotto  at  Bethlehem  where 
Christ  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,^  and  that  these 
were  adorned  by  Constantine  with  royal  magnificence. 

Helena  died  in  about  her  eightieth  year.  The 
Emperor  was  present  with  her  at  her  death  :^  but 
there  is  no  clear  record  of  the  place  of  her  death  or 
burial ;  it  was  either  at  Rome  or  Constantinople.^ 

Constantine's  filial  reverence  for  his  mother  (a 
woman  of  humble  origin,  who  had  been  put  away 
by  her  husband,  his  father,  for  a  nobler  consort  in 
A.D.  292,  after  twenty  years'  conjugal  union)  is  one  of 
the  brightest  traits  of  his  character.  Her  death  was 
a  heavy  loss  to  him  and  to  the  Church.  He  was  thus 
brought  under  the  powerful  influence  of  his  sister 
Constantia,*  to  whom  he  showed  the  tenderest  affec- 
tion in  her  last  sickness,  and  who  on  her  death-bed 
commended   Arius  to  his  special  favour.     For  this 

*  The  arguments  for  "the  invention  of  the  Cross,"  as  well  as  for  the 
discovery  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  are  stated  by  Cardinal  Newman  on 
Ecclesiastical  Miracles, pp.  cxliii — cxlix,  and  by  De  Broglie,  De  I'Eglise, 
ii.  117 — 123.  On  the  other  hand,  compare  Mr.  Argles  in  Wace's  Diet, 
ii.  822. 

^  Vit.  Const,  iii.  41—43. 
^  Whom  he  calls  Ocotokos. 
-  Euseb.  iii.  46. 
3  Euseb.  iii.  47.     Socr.  i.  17. 

*  See  vol.  i.  420  of  the  present  work. 


Constantine  recalls  Arms  and  Eusehius  ofNicomedia.     49 

purpose  Constantia  employed  the  instrumentality  of 
her  favourite  spiritual  adviser,  an  Arian  priest  (whose 
name  is  not  recorded),  and  who  after  her  death 
acquired  great  influence  over  the  Emperor's  mind, 
and  maintained  an  ascendency  over  it  till  the 
Emperor's  death,  who  (in  the  absence  of  his  three 
sons)  consigned  his  last  will  and  testament  to  the 
confidential  keeping  of  this  Presbyter.  She  assured 
Constantine  by  means  of  this  priest  that  Arius  was 
sound  in  the  faith,  and  had  been  unjustly  condemned.^ 

Constantine  wrote  to  Arius,  who,  in  conjunction 
with  his  friend  Euzoius,  addressed  a  supplicatory 
letter  to  the  Emperor,  in  which  they  presented  to 
him  a  confession  of  faith,  not  in  the  words  of  the 
Nicene  Creed,  but  purporting  to  be  in  perfect  accord- 
ance with  "the  teaching  of  Scripture  and  the 
Catholic  faith,"  and  in  which  they  prayed  to  be 
restored  to  their  spiritual  mother,  the  Church.^ 

Having  received  this  assurance,  Constantine  recalled 
Arius  and  Euzoius  from  exile.  And  not  long  after- 
wards, the  Episcopal  leader  of  Arianism,  Eusebius  of 
Nicomedia,  and  his  friend  Theognis  of  Nicaea, 
addressed  a  similar  petition  to  Constantine,  in  which 
they  declared  their  acceptance  of  the  term  co7isub- 
stantial  in  the  Creed  (it  having,  they  said,  been  duly 
explained  to  them  7),  and  they  also  were  allowed  to 
return,  and  were  restored  by  him  to  their  sees. 

Arius,  though  restored  by  Constantine,  was  not  re- 
admitted to  communion  by  Athanasius,  who  stated 
to  Constantine  the  reasons  for  his  refusal  to  receive 
him.     He  had  discovered  that  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia, 

5  Sozomen,  ii.  27. 

6  Socr.  i.  25.     Sozomen,  ii.  27,  and  ii.  16. 

7  Socr.  i.  4.    Philostorg.  ii.  7. 

VOL.   II.  E 


50       Athmiasius  refuses  to  receive  Arius  to  conwummi, 

who  importunately  urged  Athanasius  to  receive  Arius, 
was  conspiring  with  the  Meletians  of  Egypt  against 
Athanasius  in  favour  of  Arius  and  his  opinions  ;  ^  and 
Eusebius  prevailed  on  Constantine  himself  to  write  to 
Athanasius  in  terms  of  menace,  that  if  he  did  not 
receive  Arius,  he  should  feel  his  royal  displeasure. 
"  Since,"  wrote  the  Emperor  to  him,  "  you  know  my 
will,  I  require  you  to  admit  all  who  desire  to  be 
received  into  the  Church  ;  and  if  I  hear  that  you  refuse 
to  do  so,  I  will  send  some  to  depose  you."  "  To  which 
I  replied/'  said  the  Archbishop,  "  in  writing,  that  an 
Antichristian  Heresy^  cannot  be  allowed  to  have 
communion  with  the  Catholic  Church.  Then  it  was," 
he  adds,  "  that  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  declared  that 
he  had  gained  the  opportunity  which  he  had  con- 
spired with  the  Meletians  to  seek  for  ;  and  he  wrote 
letters  to  them,  urging  them  to  contrive  a  pretext  for 
an  accusation  against  me,  as  they  had  done  against 
my  predecessors  in  the  see,  Peter,  Achillas,  and 
Alexander."  The  refusal  of  Athanasius  to  receive 
Arius  to  communion  was  not  only  galling  to  Arius 
himself,  but  to  all  who  agreed  with  him  in  doctrine, 
and  to  all  who  thought  that  he  had  been  harshly 
treated  at  Nicaea  and  afterwards  ;  and  especially  to 
those  Bishops  who  had  received  Arius  to  communion, 
and  to  the  Emperor  who  had  commanded  that  recep- 
tion ;  and  it  prejudiced  Constantine  against  Athana- 
sius. But  events  proved  that  Athanasius  had  a  clear 
foresight  of  what  that  reception  involved  ;  and  though 
he  was  denounced  by  many  as  severe,  and  was  perse- 
cuted as  intolerant,  yet  it  afterwards  was  manifest 
that  he  was  actuated  by  the  noblest  motives  of  fer- 

«  Athanas.  Apol.  §  59. 

"  Xpto'TOfxaxos  alp^ais,  Apol.  §  59. 


Accusations  against  Athanasius.  5 1 

vent  zeal  for  God's  glory,  and  of  tender  love  for  the 
salvation  of  souls. 

The  enemies  of  Athanasius  did  not  venture  to  assail 
him  on  any  question  of  doctrine.  This  they  knew 
could  not  be  sustained.  But  they  began  with  charges 
which  they  foresaw  would  exasperate  the  Emperor 
against  him.  Athanasius  (they  said)  had  usurped 
royal  authority,  and  had  imposed  a  new  tax  in  Egypt 
on  linen  tunics,  and  had  applied  the  revenue  to  the 
use  of  his  own  Church.^  Three  persons  of  the 
Meletian  party  were  despatched  from  Egypt  to  Nico- 
media,  where  the  Emperor  then  was.  Two  Alexan- 
drian priests  also  happened  to  be  there,  and  cleared 
their  Bishop  from  the  charge.  One  was  Macarius, 
who  afterwards  held  a  prominent  place  as  associated 
with  Athanasius  in  the  arraignments  against  him.  The 
Emperor  sent  for  Athanasius,  and  when  he  arrived  the 
Meletians  shifted  their  ground  and  charged  him  with 
having  sent  a  sum  of  gold  to  a  rebel  Philumenus,  and 
with  having  despatched  that  priest  Macarius  to  a 
Church  in  a  small  village  in  his  Diocese  ;  and  further 
they  accused  Macarius  of  having  broken  a  sacred 
chalice  in  the  hands  of  a  Meletian  priest,  Ischyras, 
when  in  the  act  of  consecrating  the  Holy  Eu- 
charist. 

It  was  proved,  however,  that  Ischyras  was  not  a 
Priest,  having  not  been  ordained  by  a  Bishop,  but  by 
Colluthus,  a  presbyter  ;  ^  that  there  was  no  Church  in 
the  village  where  the  outrage  was  said  to  have  taken 
place ;  and  that  the  day  on  which  the  outrage  was 
said  to  have  been  committed,  was  not  a  Sunday,  and 
consequently  there  was  no  celebration  on  that  day ; 
and  that  on  that  day  Ischyras  was  incapable  of  cele- 

»  Apol.  §  60.  '  Ibid.  §§  12,  76,  47. 

E   2 


52  Those  charges  refuted. — Eustathius^  Bishop  of  Antioch, 

brating,  being  confined  to  his  bed  by  sickness.  Sub- 
sequently Ischyras  himself  confessed  that  he  had  been 
suborned  by  the  Meletians,  and  that  the  whole  charge 
was  a  groundless  fabrication.^ 

Constantine,  having  examined  these  charges,  dis- 
missed them  as  frivolous  and  false  ;  and  wrote  a  letter 
to  the  Church  of  Alexandria,  in  which  he  justified 
Athanasius,  and  exhorted  them  to  live  in  peace.  "  I 
have  received  your  Bishop  Athanasius,"  said  the 
Emperor,  "  and  have  conversed  with  him,  being  per- 
suaded that  he  is  a  man  of  God.  This  is  my  judg- 
ment. He  will  bear  my  greeting  to  you.  May  God 
keep  you,  beloved  brethren."  ■* 

Such  was  the  first  act  in  this  tragical  drama. 

The  Arians  next  attacked  a  venerable  friend  of 
Athanasius,  one  who  had  taken  a  leading  part  in  the 
Council  of  Nicsea — Eustathius,  Bishop  of  Antioch,^  the 
third  Church  in  Christendom  after  Rome  and  Alex- 
andria. 

Eustathius  (says  Athanasius  ^)  was  a  holy  confessor 
of  the  faith,  and  a  bold  champion  of  the  truth  ;  and 
because  he  had  vehemently  opposed  the  Arian 
heresy,  and  would  not  receive  the  Arians  to  commu- 
nion, he  was  accused  by  them  to  Constantine  as  guilty 
of  contumely  to  the  Emperor's  mother,  Helena. 

In  this  attempt  they  were  aided  by  Eusebius 
of  Nicomedia,  and  Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  who  had 
been   exasperated    against    Eustathius    by    charges 

3  Apol.  §  64,  where  Ischyras  himself  confesses  that  "there  was  no 
chalice  broken,  no  holy  table  overturned,  but  I  was  forced  to  say  what 
I  did."     Cp.  ibid.  §§  28,  62—65,  68,  74. 

4  Ibid.  §  62. 

^  See  above,  vol.  i.  p.  451. 

^  Hist.  Arian.  §  4.  And  see  the  article  of  Precentor  Venables  in 
Professor  Wace's  Dictionary,  i.  p.  382. 


Eustathius  condemned  and  deposed.  53 

of  heterodoxy/  to  which  they  retorted  by  an  accusa- 
tion of  Sabellianism,  which  was  a  common  allegation 
of  the  Arians  against  the  maintainers  of  the  Nicene 
faith. 

These  Arian  assaults  against  their  antagonists 
were  frequently  combined  with  religious  acts,  such  as 
the  Dedication  of  Churches.  A  desire  to  be  present 
at  the  Consecration  of  the  great  Church  which  Con- 
stantine  had  built  at  Jerusalem,  was  pleaded  as  a 
pretext  for  the  visit  of  some  Arianizing  Bishops, 
especially  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  to  Antioch,  in- 
their  way  to  the  Holy  City.  The  Emperor  was  grati- 
fied with  the  proposal,  and  supplied  them  with  public 
carriages  for  its  accomplishment. 

On  their  return  from  the  grand  Ceremonial  at 
Jerusalem,  they  held  a  Council  at  Antioch.  Eusta- 
thius  was  not  accused  of  heterodoxy,  but  of  dis- 
loyalty ^  and  immorality,  and  was  condemned  and 
deposed.  The  charge  of  immorality  was  afterwards 
declared  to  be  false  by  the  abandoned  woman  who 
made  it.^ 

Eustathius  retired  peaceably  from  Antioch,  being 
banished  by  Constantine  to  Thrace,  at  the  instance 
of  the  Eusebians,  and  afterwards  to  Illyria ;  but  his 
memory  was  long  cherished  by  the  faithful  of  his  flock, 
who  called  themselves  Eustathians.^ 

"  Sozomen,  ii.  18,  19.  Socrates,  i.  23,  24.  Theodoret,  i.  20.  This 
statement,  as  far  as  concerns  Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  is  denied  by  some  ; 
see  Bp.  Lightfoot  on  Eusebius  in  Wace's  Diet.  i.  p.  315. 

8  Athanas.  Hist.  Arian.  §  4. 

^  Theodoret,  i.  20  and  21.  Constantine  in  his  Epistle  to  the  people 
of  Antioch,  and  Eusebius  in  his  history  of  the  time  (iii.  60,  61),  mention 
the  popular  excitement  produced  by  the  trial,  but  do  not  say  that 
Eustathius  was  guilty  of  any  crime. 

^  Eustathius  was  also  celebrated  in  a  special  oration  by  Chrysostom, 
for  some  years  presbyter  at  Antioch  (ii.  718,  ed.  Paris.  1837). 


5  4-     Aria7i  Bishops  of  Antioch.     Other  charges  against 
Athanasius. 

The  See  of  Antioch,  having  thus  become  vacant, 
^yas  offered  to  Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  who  to  his  honour 
decHned  it.^ 

However,  the  Eusebians  raised  to  it  no  less  than 
six  Arian  Bishops  in  succession.^ 

Another  storm  was  now  about  to  break  on  the 
Church  and  Athanasius. 

A  certain  Meletian  Bishop,  Arsenius,  was  suborned 
by  the  Arians,  assisted  by  the  ecclesiastical  head  of 
the  Meletians  in  Egypt,  John,  surnamed  Arcaph. 
They  bribed  Arsenius  to  secrete  himself  in  a  monas- 
tery in  Upper  Egypt,  and  then  they  circulated  a 
report  that  Arsenius  had  been  murdered  by  Athana- 
sius, and  that  his  body  had  been  mutilated  by  him 
for  magical  purposes  ;  and  in  attestation  of  this  they 
carried  about  with  them  a  dead  hand,  which  they  said 
was  the  hand  of  Arsenius.'* 

This  charge  was  laid  before  the  Emperor,  who  re- 
ferred the  matter  to  Dalmatius  the  Censor,  his  half- 
brother  ;  and  he  ordered  a  Synod  to  meet  at  Caesarea 
in  Palestine  (A.D.  333  or  334),^  probably  selected  by 
Constantine  on  account  of  his  regard  for  Eusebius, 
the  Bishop  of  that  See.  Theodoret  says^  that  it 
was  removed  to  Tyre  in  deference  to  the  prejudices 
of  Athanasius  against  Eusebius. 

This  Council  of  Tyre  was  held  in  A.D.  335,  the 

2  Euseb.  Vit.  Const,  iii.  60,  61.  Probably  on  the  ground  that 
Episcopal  translations  had  been  condemned  at  Nic?ea  (Canon  5). 
Eustathius  himself  had  been  translated  to  Antioch  from  Beroea  in  Syria, 
but  before  that  Council. 

'  Eulalius,  Euphronius,  Placitus  (or  Placillus),  Stephanas,  Leontius, 
Eudoxius  ;  see  Theodoret,  v.  39. 

*  Ath.  Apol.  42,  63.     Socr.  i.  27.     Soz.  ii.  25.     Theodoret,  i.  26. 

^  See  Montfaucon,  Vit.  Ath.  p.  xxiv. 

«  i.  26. 


Council  of  Tyre,  55 

thirtieth  year  of  Constantino's  reign  (which  he  pro- 
posed to  celebrate  by  the  dedication  of  the  Great 
Church  at  Jerusalem),  under  the  secular  authority  of 
Count  Dionysius,  formerly  Consular  of  Phoenicia,  at- 
tended by  a  strong  military  body-guard. 

The  Synod  consisted  of  about  sixty  Bishops,  prin- 
cipally "  Eusebians,"  as  they  were  called  from  their 
chief,  Euseblus  of  Nicomedia,  who  was  attended  by 
Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  Placillus  of  Antioch,  Theognis 
of  Nicsea,  Theodore  ^  of  Heraclea,  Maris  of  Chalce- 
don,  Ursacius  of  Singidunum,  and  Valens  of  Mursa 
in  Pannonia — afterwards  notorious  in  the  history 
of  Arian  Synods.  A  few  orthodox  Bishops  were 
there  :  Maximus  of  Jerusalem,  Marcellus  of  Ancyra, 
Alexander  of  Thessalonica,  Asclepas  of  Gaza.  Atha- 
nasius  hesitated  to  appear  ;  but  being  expressly  sum- 
moned by  the  Emperor  (who  addressed  a  pacific 
letter  to  the  Synod  ^),  he  came  to  the  Council,  accom- 
panied by  forty-seven  of  his  Suffragans  from  Egypt, 
amonsf  whom  were  two  confessors  of  the  faith, 
Paphnutius  and  Potammon.  His  priest  Macarius 
was  also  there,  brought  by  soldiers  a  prisoner  in 
chains.  Athanasius  himself  with  his  Suffragan  Bishops 
was  kept  standing  in  the  presence  of  the  Bishops 
seated  in  Council. 

Indignant  at  this  sight,  Potammon,  Bishop  of  Hera- 
clea in  Egypt,  who  had  lost  an  eye  in  the  persecution 
under  Maximian,  burst  into  tears,  and  vented  his  feel- 
ings in  an  exclamation  of  grief  and  surprise  :  ^ — 

^  Theodore  of  Perinthus  or  Heraclea  may  be  mentioned  as  a  specimen 
of  the  pious  and  learned  men  of  the  party  :  he  was  the  author  of  Com- 
mentaries  on  the  Gospels  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  John,  and  other  parts 
of  Scripture. 

8  Theodoret,  i.  27. 

'••  Epiphan.  Hseres.  69. 


56  Accusations  against  Athanasius. 

"What!  art  thou,  Eusebius,  sitting  there  to  judge 
Athanasius  ? — thou  who  wast  a  prisoner  with  me  in 
the  time  of  persecution  ;  thou,  who,  when  I  lost  an 
eye,  didst  escape  unhurt — not,  I  trow,  with  a  clear 
conscience."  "  If  you  are  so  arrogant  (replied  Euse- 
bius) at  a  distance  from  home,  doubtless  there  is 
good  reason  why  you  should  be  accused  as  having 
been  guilty  of  petulant  pride  in  your  own  country."  ^ 

The  accusations  against  Athanasius  were  then 
heard  and  examined. 

They  were  mainly  as  follows  :— 

1.  The  invalidity  of  his  election  and  consecration 
to  the  Episcopate. 

2.  Acts  of  cruelty  during  his  Episcopate. 

3.  The  breaking  of  the  sacred  Chalice  in  the  hands 
of  Ischyras. 

4.  The  murder  of  Arsenius. 

5.  Violence  done  to  a  Virgin  dedicated  to  God. 
This  last  charge  ^  was  not  specified  in  the  Synodi- 

cal  Acts,  and   is  never  mentioned  by  Athanasius  in 
his  full  accounts  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Synod, 

1  Eusebius,  who  in  his  life  of  Constantine  inserts  the  Emperor's 
long  eirenical  address  to  the  Council  at  Tyre,  and  describes  what  took 
place  before  and  after  it  (iii.  41,  42),  does  not  even  mention  the  charges 
against  Athanasius  which  were  the  cause  of  it,  nor  even  his  name. 
Many  learned  disputations  have  been  written  on  the  historical  utterances 
of  Eusebius  ;  but  we  still  need  an  Essay  on  his  reticences. 

The  most  memorable  are,  his  omission  of  all  reference  to  the  murder 
of  Crispus  the  son,  and  of  Fausta  the  wife,  of  Constantine  (see 
Bp.  Lightfoot's  learned  article  on  Eusebius  in  Wace's  Diet.  p.  327). 
These  omissions  strengthen  the  general  belief  that  these  murders  were 
ordered  by  the  imperial  patron  of  Eusebius.  The  omission  of  the  name 
of  Athanasius,  especially  in  connexion  with  the  proceedings  of  the 
Synod  of  Tyre,  is  attributed  by  Montfaucon  (Vit.  Athan.  p.  i)  to  the 
historian's  sense  of  shame  for  those  charges. 

2  It  is  mentioned  by  Rufinus,  i.  17,  and  after  him  by  Sozomen,  ii.  25  ; 
Theodoret,  i.  28. 


Refutatio7i  of  those  charges.  57 

nor  by  Epiphanius.  If  it  was  ever  brought  forward, 
the  triumphant  manner  in  which  it  was  exploded 
(as  stated  by  Rufinus,  Sozomen,  and  Theodoret)  made 
it  too  ridiculous  to  be  further  insisted  upon  by  the 
Council,  or  to  be  noticed  by  the  accused. 

As  to  the  first  of  the  charges,  it  has  been  already 
shown  to  be  groundless ;  and  the  presence  of  forty 
Suffragans  from  Egypt,  who  followed  their  Arch- 
bishop to  the  Council,  was  a  sufficient  proof  of  his 
Canonical  status.  The  love  of  his  flock  for  him,  and 
their  universal  enthusiasm  on  his  behalf,  were  after- 
wards manifested  on  several  trying  occasions. 

The  second  charge  was  disproved,  by  the  testimony 
of  the  Egyptian  Episcopate  in  his  favour.^ 

The  third  charge,  the  breaking  of  the  Chalice,  has 
already  been  disposed  of. 

It  would  be  tedious  to  recount  all  the  details  which 
were  brought  to  light  on  the  fourth — the  alleged 
murder  of  Arsenius. 

Suffice  it  to  say,  that  by  an  extraordinary  con- 
currence of  circumstances,  Athanasius  succeeded  in 
tracking  him  from  one  lurking-place  to  another,  and 
at  last  presenting  him  alive  to  the  astonished  Council, 
which  had  the  dead  hand  preserved  with  salt  in  a 
box  before  them.  Arsenius  was  brought  forward 
by  him  with  his  two  hands  muffled  up  in  a  cloak. 
First  one  hand  was  drawn  forth  from  it,  then  the 
other  hand.  "And  (added  Athanasius)  since  God  has 
given  to  man  only  two  hands,  I  leave  it  to  those 
who  have  got  that  third  hand  in  the  box  to  tell 
us  how  they  came  by  it."  * 

3  Seethe  protestations  of  the  forty-seven  Bishops  in  behalf  of  Atha- 
nasius, Concil.  General,  ii.  pp.  451  and  454,  ed.  Labbe. 

4  Socr.  i.  28.  Soz.  ii.  25.  Theodoret,  i.  28.  Cp.  Athanas. 
Apol.  72. 


58     Confusion  of  his  accusers — Remojistrances  in  his  favour. 

Arsenlus  himself,  with  his  Meletian  presbyters  and 
deacons,  made  a  humble  submission  to  Athanasius, 
and  declined  all  further  intercourse  with  his  accusers, 
and  requested  to  be  admitted  to  communion  by  him.^ 

The  Euseblans,  being  thus  confounded,  moved  for  a 
Commission  of  Inquiry,  to  be  despatched  to  Egypt 
to  the  Mareotic  region  (lying  west  of  Alexandria)  for 
examination  on  the  spot  into  the  matter  of  Ischyras. 
Dionysius  consented,  and  a  Commission,  composed  of 
inveterate  foes  of  Athanasius  (Theognis,  Maris,  Theo- 
dore, Macedonius,  Ursacius,  and  Valens),  set  out  at 
once  as  envoys  from  the  Council  for  the  inquiry.^ 
Macarius  the  presbyter  was  left  by  the  Council  in 
the  hands  of  the  soldiers  a  prisoner  in  chains.  In 
vain  did  forty-seven  Bishops  of  Egypt  unite  in  a 
protest  to  the  Synod  against  these  arbitrary  proceed- 
ings. The  Clergy  also  of  Alexandria,  and  those 
of  the  Mareotic  district,  put  forth  a  similar  appeal 
to  the  Civil  Powers  as  follows  : — "  Inasmuch  as 
Theognis,  Maris^  Macedonius,  Theodore,,  Ursacius, 
and  Valens,  being  sent  by  the  Bishops  of  the 
Council  at  Tyre  into  our  district,  have  declared 
that  they  are  commissioned  to  inquire  into  certain 
Ecclesiastical  misdemeanours,  especially  concerning 
the  breaking  of  a  Chalice,  although  they  themselves 
beforetime  suborned  (as  a  witness)  a  certain  Ischyras, 
whom  they  have  brought  with  them  (a  man  who  is 
by  no  means  a  priest,  inasmuch  as  he  was  ordained  by 
CoUuthus,  who  was  not  a  Bishop),  we  adjure  you  by 
Almighty  God  and  by  our  lord  Constantine  Augustus, 
and  his  sons,  to  take  these  matters  into  your  cogni- 

^  This  document  is  inserted  in  Athanas.  Apol.  §  69,  and  Concil. 
General,  ii.  448,  ed.  Labbe. 

6  Athanas.  Apol.  §  72.     Concil.  ii.  p.  451. 


Athanasius  ^condemned  and  deposed^  appeals  to  Constantine,  59 

zance  ;  for  Ischyras  is  not  a  priest  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  nor  has  he  a  Church,  nor  was  any  Chalice 
broken  ;  but  all  these  things  are  falsehoods  and 
fabrications."^ 

The  venerable  Bishop  of  Thessalonica,  Alexander, 
addressed  also  a  strong  remonstrance  to  Count 
Dionysius  on  the  iniquity  of  these  proceedings,  and 
on  the  foul  conspiracy  against  Athanasius.^  The 
Count,  although  he  did  not  approve  of  the  Mareotic 
Commissioners,  who  were  guilty  of  violent  outrages 
against  the  faithful  ^  at  Alexandria,  yet  adopted  no 
active  measures  against  them. 

Athanasius  saw  no  other  resource  than  in  an 
immediate  personal  appeal  to  the  Emperor  ;  he  there- 
fore departed  from  Tyre  and  went  to  Constantinople. 

The  Synod  condemned  him  in  his  absence,  and 
deposed  him  from  his  See,^  and  they  announced  their 
decision  to  Constantine. 

The  deliberations  being  thus  ended,  they  repaired  to 
Jerusalem  in  the  month  of  September  for  the  dedica- 
tion of  the  new  Church,  the  Church  of  the  Holy 
Sepulchre,  called  the  "Great  Martyrium"^  on  Calvary. 
The  splendour  of  that  building,  and  the  solemnities 
with  which  it  was  consecrated,  the  services  of  prayer 
and  praise  and  eucharistic  celebration,  the  pane- 
gyrical orations  at  the  encaenia,  are  fully  described  by 
Eusebius.^ 

This  assembly  at  Jerusalem,  which  was  also  called 

^  Athanas.  Apol.  §  73,  A.D.  335.    Concil.  General,  ii.  458. 

8  Athanas.  Apol.  §  80. 

9  Ibid.  §  83. 

1  Sozonien,  ii.  25.  Socrates  (i.  28)  says  that  this  was  done  after  the 
return  of  the  Commissioners. 

2  Euseb.  Vit.  Const,  iv.  43.  Soar.  i.  33.   Soz.  ii.  26.  Theodoret,  i.  29. 

3  Euseb.  Vit.  Const,  ill.  30—39  ;  iv.  43,  45. 


6o  Arius  is  received  to  communion  at  Jerusalem. 

a  Synod,  was  made  still  more  memorable  by  the 
reception  of  Arius  to  communion.  This  Council 
addressed  a  Synodical  Letter^  to  ''  the  Church  of  Alex- 
andria, and  to  all  who  are  in  Egypt,  and  the  Thebaid, 
and  Libya,  and  Pentapolis ;  and  to  all  Bishops, 
Priests,  and  Deacons  throughout  the  world."  In 
it  they  announced  that  "  they  had  received  letters 
from  the  most  religious  Emperor,  exhorting  them  to 
do  their  duty,  in  driving  away  all  envy  and  hatred 
from  the  Church,  and  to  re-admit  peaceably  the 
Arians,  who  had  been  kept  out  of  the  Church  by 
jealousy,  and  whose  soundness  of  faith  he  has  ascer- 
tained and  attests  and  declares  to  us ;  and  whose 
profession  of  faith  he  has  communicated  to  us,  and 
which  we  ourselves  have  approved.  He  therefore 
equitably  exhorted  us  to  admit  them,  in  a  letter  of 
which  we  send  a  copy  to  you  ;  and  we  are  persuaded 
that  you  will  rejoice  to  embrace  them  as  brethren ; 
and  it  therefore  behoves  you — having  learnt  what 
has  been  done  by  us,  and  that  they  have  been 
received  by  this  august  Synod,  and  have  communi- 
cated with  us — to  admit  them  as  speedily  as  possible, 
and  to  salute  them,  in  order  that  they  may  be  united 
in  peace  with  the  Church ;  especially  since  their 
Confession  of  faith,  publicly  promulgated,  maintains 
the  undoubted  Apostolic  tradition  accepted  by  all." 

In  the  mean  time,  Athanasius,  accompanied  by  five 
Bishops,^  arrived  at  Constantinople.  He  met  the 
Emperor  riding  on  horseback  into  the  city,  and 
accosted  him.  The  interview  is  thus  described  by 
the  Emperor  himself,  in  a  letter  addressed  to  the 
Bishops  at  Tyre  : — 

*  Concil.  General,  ii.  p.  46,  ed.  Labbe.     Athanas.  Apol.  §  84. 

*  Socr.  i.  34.     Sozomen,  ii.  28.     Athanas.  Apol.  §  2)7. 


Interview  of  Athanasius  with  Co7ista?itlne.  6i 

"  As  I  was  riding-  on  horseback  into  the  most  happy 
city,  Constantinople  which  bears  my  name,  sud- 
denly, to  my  surprise,  the  Bishop  Athanasius,  with 
some  companions,^  met  me  in  the  middle  of  the 
road.  At  first  I  did  not  recognize  him,  God  is  my 
witness  ;  but  when  I  asked  my  attendants  who  he  was, 
and  what  wrongs  he  had  suffered,  they  informed  me. 
I  did  not  exchange  a  word  with  him  at  that  time. 
But  when  he  entreated  me  to  hear  him,  and  I  de- 
clined to  do  so,  and  almost  ordered  him  to  be  driven 
away,  he  with  more  confidence  affirmed  that  he  asked 
no  other  favour  than  that  I  would  require  you  to 
come  to  me  here,  in  order  that  in  your  presence  he 
might  complain  to  me  of  the  injuries  done  to  him.^ 
This  seems  to  be  only  just  and  reasonable,  and 
therefore  I  have  directed  this  summons  to  be  sent 
to  you,  that  as  many  of  you  as  formed  the  Synod  of 
Tyre,  may  hasten  to  my  clemency,  and  prove  by  your 
acts  the  sincerity  and  equity  of  your  decision,  in  the 
presence  of  me,  whom  you  cannot  deny  to  be  a  true 
servant  of  God.  Therefore,  make  all  speed  to  come, 
and  be  sure  that  I  will  do  my  best  that  the  things 
prescribed  in  God's  law,  which  cannot  be  censured, 
may  be  maintained  firm  and  immovable,  and  that 
those  enemies  of  God's  law  may  be  utterly  dispersed 
and  crushed,  who  under  pretence  of  His  Holy  Name 
vent  divers  blasphemies.'^ 

The  Eusebians  were  alarmed  by  this  imperial  man- 

6  fx^rh.  kripwv  TivQv,  Ath.  Apol.  §  Z^.  Perhaps  for  kr^p^v  we  ought 
to  read  kToJipw.  Valesius,  in  Socr.  i.  34,  prefers  UpS>v  (priests),  the 
reading  of  Socrates,  but  this  seems  too  violent  a  change. 

7  Epiphanius  (Hseres.  §  68)  states  that  Athanasius  said  to  the 
Emperor,  "  The  Lord  will  judge  between  you  and  me,  because  you  take 
part  with  those  that  slander  me." 


62  Athanasius  banished  to  Gaul, 

date.  They  nominated  a  small  ^  deputation  of  their 
own  body  to  go  to  Constantinople  :  the  two  Eusebii, 
Theognis  and  Patrophilus,  Ursacius  and  Valens. 
These  delegates,  when  they  came  before  the  Emperor, 
said  no  more  of  the  charges  made  at  Tyre  against 
Athanasius,  such  as  the  broken  chalice,  and  the  murder 
of  Arsenius.  "  But  Athanasius,"  they  said,  "was  heard 
to  threaten  that  he  would  intercept  the  usual  supply 
of  corn  to  Constantinople." 

This  was  too  much  for  the  Emperor.  He  had  lately 
caused  Sopater  to  be  executed  for  this  offence.^  His 
own  imperial  dignity,  that  of  the  magnificent  capital 
lately  built  and  adorned  by  him,  the  welfare  of  its 
inhabitants  who  depended  for  their  doles  of  corn  on 
the  supply  from  Egypt,  were  outraged  by  this  act  of 
a  proud  prelate.  "  He  would  not  even  listen  to  my 
defence  (says  Athanasius),  and  banished  me  to  Gaul."  ^ 

Athanasius  was  sent  to  Treves,  which  was  the 
capital  of  the  "  first  province  of  Belgium,"  and  the  resi- 
dence of  the  imperial  viceroys,  and  of  the  Emperors 
themselves  when  in  Gaul.  He  reached  that  place 
in  February,  A.D.  336,  and  was  well  received  by 
Constantine,  the  eldest  son  of  the  Emperor,  and 
by  its  venerable  and  faithful  Bishop  Maximin :  he 
remained  there  for  two  years  and  a  half.  The 
Emperor  Constantine,  though  urged  by  the  Eusebians 
to  place  an  Arian  Bishop  at  Alexandria  in  his  room, 
refused  to  do  so. 

8  Socr.  i.  35.     Cp.  Athanas.  Apol.  c.  Arian.  §  9,  §  87. 

^  Eunapius,  p.  41. 

1  Apol.  §  9,  §  87,  where  is  a  letter  from  Constantine  II.  (the 
eldest  son  of  Constantine)  from  Treves  to  the  people  to  Alexandria,  in 
which  he  says  that  "  his  father  banished  Athanasius  from  Alexandria, 
in  order  to  rescue  him  from  his  enemies,  and  that  Constantine  had 
iatended  to  restore  him  to  his  See,  but  was  prevented  by  death." 


Marcellus  of  Aticyra  deposed.  Arius  is  invited  to  (i^ 
Co7ista7itinople. 
While  Athanasius  was  at  Treves,  the  Eusebians 
attacked  his  friend,  Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  in  a  Coun- 
cil assembled  at  Constantinople.^  Marcellus  had 
distinguished  himself  by  a  work  against  Asterius 
the  Sophist,  who  had  apostatized  from  Chris- 
tianity, and  had  sacrificed  to  idols,  and  afterwards 
was  a  partisan  of  Arianism.^  Eusebius,  Bishop 
of  Caesarea,  attacked  the  work  of  Marcellus,  and 
charged  him  with  Sabellianism,  and  with  hold- 
ing the  doctrines  of  Paul  of  Samosata.*  Marcellus 
was  deposed  by  the  Council,  and  another  Bishop, 
Basilius,  was  placed  in  his  room.  But  their  principal 
design  in  this  Council  was  completely  to  re-instate 
Arius  in  the  communion  of  the  Church  in  the  face  of 
the  world.  He  had  been  received  to  communion  at 
Jerusalem,  but  not  at  Alexandria,  and  had  been  spe- 
cially invited  by  Constantinetohis  own  imperial  city.^ 

Alexander,  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople,  was  then 
about  ninety-six  years  of  age  ;  he  steadily  declined 
the  importunate  solicitations  of  Arius  and  his  power- 
ful allies,  who  declared  that  they  would  cause 
Alexander  to  be  deposed,  if  on  a  given  day  he  per- 
sisted in  his  refusal  to  receive  him  to  communion.^ 

In  this  emergency  the  saintly  Bishop,  James  of 
Nisibis,  who  was  then  at  Constantinople,  comforted 
his  aged  Episcopal  brother,  and  exhorted  the  faithful 
to  resort  to  fasting  and  prayer.'  Alexander  shut 
himself  up  in  the  Church  called  Irene,  and  prostrated 

-  Concil.  General,  ii.  474.     Sozomen,  ii.  33.     Theodoret,  i.  13. 
3  Athanas.  de  Synod.  §  18. 
^  On  which  see  vol.  i.  396,  398. 
^  Socr.  i.  27  ;  i.  I'j.     Soz.  ii.  29. 
^  Epiphan.  Haer.  69. 
^    ■  Jheodoret,  Relig.  Hist.  §  i.     Socr.  i.  i"],  i^.     Soz.  ii.  30.     Rufin. 


6  4  Constantine — A  rius — Alexander ^  Bishop  of  Constantinople. 

himself  before  the  altar,  and  prayed  with  tears  some 
nights  and  days  in  succession. 

The  Eusebians  fixed  on  a  certain  Sunday  for  the 
reception  of  Arius  to  communion.  On  the  eve 
Constantine  sent  for  him,  and  asked  him  whether  he 
accepted  the  faith  of  Nicsea.  Arius  replied  in  the 
affirmative.  Constantine  demanded  his  profession  of 
faith.  Instead  of  presenting  the  Nicene  Creed,  he 
offered  a  formula  which  did  not  comprise  the  heretical 
propositions  for  which  he  had  been  excommunicated 
by  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  but  although  couched  * 
in  Scriptural  language,  did  not  contain  the  crucial 
phrase  of  all,  the  Son's  consubstantiality  with  the 
Father.  Arius  affirmed  by  oath  that  he  had  not  en- 
tertained the  heretical  opinions  for  which  he  had  been 
ejected.  "  If  thy  faith  is  sound,"  said  the  Emperor  to 
him,^  "  thou  hast  well  sworn  ;  but  if  thy  faith  is  im- 
pious, and  if,  notwithstanding,  thou  hast  taken  this 
oath,  may  God  judge  thy  cause.^' 

After  this  interview  with  the  Emperor,  the  parti- 
sans of  Arius  declared  to  the  aged  Bishop  that, 
whether  he  would  consent  or  no,  Arius  should  be 
received  to  communion  on  the  next  day  in  his 
Church. 

An  eye-witness  of  what  ensued  describes  what  then 
took  place.^  "The  Bishop  in  deep  sorrow  went  to 
the  Church,  and  knelt  down  in  tears  before  the  altar, 
and  stretched  forth  his  hands  and  prayed  thus  :  *  If 
Arius  is  to-morrow  to  be  admitted  to  communion, 
let  me  Thy  servant,  O  Lord,  depart  from  this  life, 
and  do  not  destroy  the  pious  with  the  impious.     But 

'  Athanas.  ad  Serapion.  p.  268. 

9  Ibid. 

1  Macarius  apud  Athanas,  nd  Serap.  §  3. 


Prayer  of  Bishop  Alexa?ider— Death  of  Arius.         65 

if  Thou  hast  pity  on  Thy  Church — and  I  am  sure 
Thou  wilt  have  pity — behold  what  the  Eusebians 
say  ;  and  do  not  give  up  Thine  inheritance  to  confu- 
sion and  reproach,  but  take  away  Arius  (aZpe  "Apetoz^), 
lest  by  his  entering  into  the  Church,  Heresy  may 
enter  in  with  him,  and  impiety  may  be  deemed 
to  be  piety/  When  the  Bishop  had  thus  prayed,  he 
retired  in  great  anxiety  ;  and  then  a  wonderful  and 
unexpected  event  took  place." 

It  was  late  in  the  afternoon.  Arius  came  forth  from 
the  palace,  escorted  by  his  friends,  who  were  conduct- 
ing him  in  triumph  through  the  city.  Attended  by 
a  large  crowd,  he  was  passing  through  the  public 
square,  called  the  Forum  of  Constantine,  where  stood 
a  grand  column  of  porphyry.  There  he  was  over- 
taken by  a  call  of  nature,  and  retired  for  relief  to  a 
place  behind  the  square,  leaving  one  of  his  attend- 
ants at  the  door  of  it.  After  some  delay,  he  did  not 
appear ;  the  door  was  opened,  and  he  was  found  dead. 
The  words  of  Scripture  were  applied  by  some  to  de- 
scribe the  manner  of  his  death  :  "  He  burst  asunder 
in  the  midst,  and  his  bowels  gushed  out."  2 

The  place  of  his  death  was  for  some  time  afterwards 
regarded  with  mysterious  awe  ;  but  at  length  it  was 
purchased  by  a  rich  Arian,  who  built  a  house  on  the 
site.^ 

Such  are  the  facts  of  the  history.  The  reader  will 
make  his  own  comments  upon  them.* 

2  Acts  i.  8.  Ath.  ibid.  For  the  history  of  his  death,  see  besides  the 
Epistle  of  Athanasius,  Theodoret,  i.  13  ;  Sozomen,  ii.  31  ;  Socrates, 
1.  38  ;  and  the  careful  summary  in  Tillemont,  torn.  vi.  p.  296,  ed. 
Paris.  1704. 

^  Sozomen,  ii.  30. 

^  The  different  reflections  made  by  others  may  be  seen  in  the  Letter 
of  Athanasius  quoted  above;  and  in  the  writings  of  Epiphanius, 
VOL.    IT.  p 


66     Constantine  and  AtJianasius — death  of  Alexander  :     ' 
sickness  of  Consta?itine. 

The  effects  produced  on  the  mind  of  the  Emperor 
are  variously  reported.  He  appears  to  have  been  in 
a  state  of  suspense.  He  had  banished  Athanasius 
from  Alexandria,  but  had  not  assented  to  the  propo- 
sal of  a  successor  for  his  see  ;  and  he  exiled  also  the 
head  of  the  rival  Meletian  party.  His  son  Constan- 
tine affirmed  that  he  had  intended  to  restore  Athana- 
sius. But  in  reply  to  the  appeals  of  the  people  of 
Alexandria,  and  of  Antony  in  favour  of  Athanasius, 
Constantine  replied  that  Athanasius  was  a  turbulent 
person,  and  had  been  condemned  by  the  decree  of  a 
Council  of  Bishops  at  Tyre,^  which  he  could  not 
rescind. 

Two  other  deaths  followed  soon  after  that  of  Arius  : 
first,  that  of  Alexander,  aged  ninety-eight.  Bishop  of 
Constantinople  ^ — which  see  he  had  held  for  twenty- 
three  years  ;   next,  that  of  the  Emperor  himself. 

Constantine  was  preparing  to  engage  in  a  campaign 
against  Persia,  and  had  constructed  an  itinerant 
Church  for  religious  services,  and  had  commanded 
some  Bishops  to  minister  in  it  during  his  march.''' 
The  Persians  sent  an  embassy  of  peace,  and  terms  of 
truce  were  agreed  on. 

After  Easter,  his  health,  which  had  always  been 
very  robust,  suddenly  failed  ;  and  he  resorted  to  the 
warm  baths  of  Constantinople,  and  then  Helenopolis  ; 
but  not  being  benefited  by  them,  he  thence  removed 
to  Nicomedia  in  Bithynia,  A.D.  337.  Conscious  that 
his  end  was   near,   he  resolved  to  receive  the  Holy 

Gregory  Nazianzen,  S.  Ambrose,  and  others,  cited  by  Tillemont, 
vi.  298  ;  and  in  later  times  Cardinal  Newman  on  Eccles.  Miracles, 
p.  clxx ;  De  Broglie,  Hist.  ii.  360  ;  Gibbon,  ch.  xxi.  p.  349. 

^  Sozomen,  ii.  31. 

♦>  Montfaucon,  Vit.  Ath.  p.  xxxiii. 

"  Euseb.  Vit.  Const,  iv.  56. 


Constauiine's  Baptism — and  death.  67 

Sacrament  of  Baptism.  He  had  delayed  it,  he  said 
to  the  Bishops  who  were  with  him,  because  he  desired 
to  be  baptized  in  the  river  Jordan,  in  which  his 
Saviour  had  been  baptized.^ 

He  had  humbly  confessed  his  sins  at  Helenopolis, 
and  had  received  imposition  of  hands  there ;  and 
after  that  preparation  he  received  Baptism  at  the 
Villa  Ancyrona,  a  suburb  of  Nicomedia,  from  Eusebius 
the  Bishop  of  that  city,  assisted  by  other  Bishops. 
''  Thus,"  says  his  biographer,  Eusebius  of  Caesarea, 
"he  was  the  first  of  Roman  Emperors,  who  by  re- 
generation was  perfected  in  the  testimonies  of  Christ ; 
and  being  honoured  with  the  divine  seal,  he  was 
renewed,  and  filled  with  divine  light.  He  was  attired 
in  a  white  baptismal  robe,  which  he  wore  till  his 
death,  never  exchanging  it  for  the  purple." 

After  prayer  and  praise  and  thanksgiving  to 
Almighty  God,  he  died  about  noon  on  Whit-Sunday, 
May  22,  A.D.  337,  aged,  probably,  sixty-three  years, 
having  reigned  nearly  thirty-one  years — the  longest 
reign  of  any  Roman  Emperor  since  that  of  Augustus. 

His  body,  having  been  laid  out  in  state  in  a  coffin 
of  gold  covered  with  purple,^  was  carried  from  Nico- 
media to  Constantinople,  where  it  was  placed  on  high 
in  the  stateliest  room  of  the  palace,  and  was  adorned 
with  the  imperial  diadem  and  other  insignia  of  royalty, 
and  surrounded  with  burning  tapers  on  golden  candle- 
sticks, and  at  length  was  buried  by  his  second  son, 
Constantius,  in  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Apostles 
at  Constantinople. 

8  Euseb.  Vit.  Const,  iv.  62.  ^  Ibid.  iv.  (>^,  6"],  70. 


F  2 


CHAPTER  III. 

From  the  accession  of  the  three  sons  of  Constantine 
(Constantine  II.,  Constantiiis ,  and  Constans), 
A.D.  337,  to  tJie  death  of  Constans,  A.D.  350,  when 
Constantius  became  sole  Emperor, 

It  was  a  fortunate  thing  for  the  Church  that  Athana- 
sius,  when  banished  by  Constantine  in  the  beginning 
of  A.D.  336,  had  been  sent  into  the  West,  and  not,  as 
some  other  Bishops  (who  were  exiled  in  that  century 
for  their  faith  and  courage),  to  some  inhospitable 
regions  of  the  East.  Thus  he  was  brought  into  con- 
tact with  the  two  Emperors  of  the  West,  Constantine 
the  eldest,  and  Constans  the  youngest,  son  of  Con- 
stantine ;  and  was  enabled  to  exercise  a  salutary 
influence  over  them. 

It  was  also  a  happy  thing  that  he  had  been  sent  to 
Treves,  the  imperial  residence  of  Constantine,  the 
joint  Emperor  of  the  West.  At  the  death  of  Con- 
stantine the  partition  of  the  Empire  was  as  follows  : — 
Constantine^  the  eldest,  received  Gaul  and  Spain,  and 
all  the  countries  beyond  the  Alps.  To  Constans,  the 
youngest,  were  assigned  Rome,  Italy,  Sicily,  Illyria, 
and  Africa.  Constantius,  the  second,  received  the 
capital  of  the  East,  Constantinople,  Asia,  and  Egypt.^ 

^  This  partition  was,  in  the  main,  consequent  on  the  expressed  will 
of  Constantine.     Euseb.  Vit.  Const,  iv.  51. 


So7ts  of  Constantine — Bloodshed  at  their  accession.      69 

Constantine,  the  eldest  son  of  Constantine  and 
Fausta,  was  born  in  A.D.  312;  Constantius  in  A.D. 
317  (Aug.  6)  ;  Constans  about  A.D.  320;  so  that  the 
eldest  was  twenty-five  years  of  age,  the  second  twenty 
years  old,  and  the  youngest  only  seventeen,  at  their 
accession. 

The  accession  of  Constantius  was  marked  by  the 
sacrifice  of  the  lives  of  all,  except  his  two  brothers,  who 
might  be  supposed  to  be  rivals  to  the  throne.  This, 
it  is  said,  was  done  at  the  instigation  of  the  army,  who 
would  not  serve  under  any  one  except  the  sons  of 
Constantine.  Julius  the  father  of  Julian,  Constan- 
tius his  uncle,  and  Dalmatius  and  Hanniballian  his 
cousins,^  and  four  other  members  of  his  family 
perished  in  that  massacre.  Dalmatius  had  received 
the  title  of  Caesar  from  Constantine  with  the  govern- 
ment of  Thrace,  Macedonia,  and  Achaia  ;  Hannibal- 
lian had  the  name  of  King,  with  royal  sway  over  Cap- 
padocia,  Pontus,  and  Armenia  ;  and  he  resided  at 
Caesarea  in  Cappadocia,  afterwards  the  Episcopal 
see  of  S.  Basil.  On  their  death  Thrace  and  Cappa- 
docia were  ceded  to  Constantius  ;  Macedonia  and 
Achaia  to  Constantine,  his  elder  brother. 

Two  sons  of  Julius  were  spared  on  account  of  their 
tender  age :  Gallus  afterwards  Caesar  under  Con- 
stantius ;  and  Julian,  the  successor  of  Constantius  in 
the  Empire  of  the  Roman  World.  They  were  placed 
under  the  tutelage  of  Eusebius,  the  friend  of  Arius, 
and  Bishop  of  Nicomedia,  who  was  distantly  related 
to  Basilina,  mother  of  Julian  ;  and  they  were  admitted 
by  Eusebius  to  the  order  of  Readers  in  the  Church. 

On  the  i8th  of  May,  338,  Constantine,  the  eldest  of 

2  Cp.  Athan.  Apol.  ad  Monachos,  §  69  ;  Zosim.  ii.  40 ;  Julian,  ad 
Atlien.  p.  276  ;  Ammian.  xxi.  16. 


70  Athanasius  restored  by  Cojistant'me  II. 

the  Emperors,  addressed  a  letter^  from  Treves  "to 
the  people  of  the  Catholic  Church  at  Alexandria,"  in 
which  he  said  that  "  Athanasius  (whom  he  calls  '  an 
expounder  of  the  adorable  law ')  had  been  sent  into 
Gaul  for  a  season  by  Constantine,  in  order  that,  inas- 
much as  the  ferocity  of  his  bloodthirsty  enemies  en- 
dangered his  sacred  head,  he  might  not  suffer  evils 
beyond  remedy  ;  and  that  he  might  escape  their 
malice,  he  was  rescued  out  of  their  jaws^  and  was 
commanded  to  dwell  under  my  protection  in  this  city  ; 
where  he  has  been  supphed  with  all  things  needful, 
although  his  illustrious  virtue,  trusting  in  the  divine 
aid,  lightly  regards  the  severest  sufferings.-" 

The  Emperor  proceeds  to  say  that  his  father  Con- 
stantine had  intended  to  restore  Athanasius  to  his 
see,  but  was  prevented  by  death ;  and  therefore  he, 
as  the  inheritor  of  his  father's  intentions,  loses  no  time 
in  fulfilling  them.  He  tells  them  with  what  respect 
Athanasius  has  been  treated,  and  "  Wonder  not,"*'  he 
adds,  "  at  anything  I  have  done  for  him,  inasmuch  as 
the  idea  of  your  desire,  and  the  form  of  so  great  a 
man,  have  prompted  me  to  it.  May  God^s  providence 
preserve  you,  beloved  brethren.  From  Treves  on  the 
15th  of  the  calends  of  June.^^ 

The  Eastern  Emperor,  Constantius,  did  not  venture 
to  oppose  his  elder  brother.  He  was  indeed  under 
the  influence  of  the  Arian  Priest  already  mentioned, 
who  had  been  entrusted  with  Constantine's  will,  and 
who  had  gained  possession  of  Eusebius  the  Eunuch, 
the  Chamberlain  of  the  Emperor,  and  of  the  Empress, 
and  had  biassed  them  in  favour  of  Arianism,  and 
against  Athanasius.* 

3  Extant  in  Athan.  Apol.  §  8. 

■♦  Socr.  ii.  2.     Sozomen,  iii.  i.     Theodoret,  ii.  2. 


His  interviews  with  Consta?itius :  his  return —        71 
new  charges  against  him. 

Athanasius,  fortified  with  Constantine's  rescript  to 
the  Alexandrines,  set  out  on  his  journey  homeward  ; 
and  in  his  return  thither  he  came  three  times  into  the 
presence  of  Constantius  :  ^  first  at  Viminiacum  in 
Moesia,  secondly  at  Constantinople,  thirdly  at  Caesarea 
in  Cappadocia. 

In  none  of  these  interviews  (as  he  afterwards  re- 
minded Constantius)  did  heattempt  to  retaliate  on  his 
enemies. 

He  arrived  in  November  at  Alexandria,  to  the  great 
joy  of  the  clergy  and  people/  The  day  of  his  return 
was  observed  as  an  annual  festival. 

His  enemies,  however,  did  not  relax  their  efforts 
against  him.  They  accused  him  to  Constantius  of 
having  embezzled  the  Corn  granted  by  Constantine  to 
the  widows  of  Alexandria,  and  they  urged  as  a  charge 
against  him,  that  having  been  condemned  and  deposed 
by  a  Council  of  the  Church  (at  Tyre),  he  had  ventured 
to  return  to  his  see  before  any  Synodical  revocation  of 
that  sentence. 

Athanasius  wrote  to  Constantius,  and  refuted  their 
calumnies  against  him.^  With  regard  to  the  judicial 
decree  against  him  of  the  Council  of  Tyre,  inasmuch 
as  much  stress  was  laid  upon  it  by  the  enemies  of 
Athanasius,  it  should  be  observed  that  such  a  Council 
could  not  have  canonical  authority,  on  account  of 
the  defects  by  which  it  was  vitiated,^  both  in  its  con- 
stitution, and  mode  of  proceeding. 

*  Apol.  ad  Const.  §  5  ;  Hist.  Arian.  §  S.     Montfaucon,  p.  xxxv. 

^  Apol,  c.  Arian,  §  7. 

7  Apol,  §  18.     Socr.  ii.  3.     Sozom.  iii.  2, 

^  See  above,  vol.  i.  p.  391,  on  the  criteria  for  determining  the  validity 
of  Synodical  decrees.  The  invalidity  of  its  decrees  is  clearly  pointed  out 
in  the  Svnodical  Letter  of  the  Alexandrine  Council,  a.d.  340,  Athan. 
Apol.  §  8. 


72     Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  translated  to  Constanthiople. 

In  order  to  accomplish  their  purpose,  Eusebius  of 
Nicomedia,  and  his  Arian  alHes,  first  made  an  effort 
to  depose  Paul,  the  orthodox  Bishop  of  Constanti- 
nople (the  successor  of  Alexander),  and  to  place 
Eusebius  himself  in  the  see  of  the  imperial  city.  In 
this  they  succeeded  ^  by  means  of  a  so-called  Synod 
held  at  Constantinople  ^  in  A.D.  339.  Next  the  Euse- 
bians  proceeded  to  Antioch,  where  they  endeavoured 
to  appoint  an  Arian  Priest  of  Alexandria,  Pistus,  to 
the  see  of  Athanasius. 

In  this,  however,  they  were  thwarted  by  the  energy 
of  the  Church  of  Alexandria  in  a  Council  held  in 
A.D.  340.  One  hundred  Bishops  met  there  in  Synod, 
and  addressed  an  Encyclic  to  all  Catholic  Bishops,  in 
which  they  protested  against  the  ambition  of  Euse- 
bius, and  against  the  cruel  injustice  perpetrated  by 
him  and  his  party  in  their  persecutions  of  Athana- 
sius. 

This  Synodical  Epistle  of  the  Bishops  assembled 
at  Alexandria  from  Egypt,  the  Thebaid,  Libya,  and 
Pentapolis,  to  all  the  Catholic  Bishops  throughout  the 
world,  is  a  clear  manifesto  on  behalf  of  Athanasius, 
and  states  all  the  charges  against  him,  and  refutes 
them. 

They  also  sent  legates  to  Julius,  Bishop  of  Rome, 
whom  the  Eusebians  had  requested  to  recognize 
Pistus  as  Bishop  of  Alexandria.  The  envoys  of  the 
two  rival  parties  met  at  Rome,  and  the  result  was 
that  the  Eiisebian  Emissaries  retreated  hastily  from 
the  city,  and  Pistus  was  rejected  as  a  heretic.^ 

Thus,  for  a  time,  the  danger  was  averted   by  the 

9  Athan.  Hist,  ad  Monachos,  §  7. 

1  Sozomen,  iii.  4. 

'  See  the  letter  of  Pope  Julius  in  Athan.  Apol.  §§  21,  22,  24. 


Death  of  the  other  Eusebiiis^  the  Churcn-nistorian —  73 
his  character. 
vigilance  of  the  Church  of  Alexandria,  and  by  the 
energy  and  faithfulness  of  the  Church  of  Rome  co- 
operating with  it  against  the  Arians  of  Constanti- 
nople, aided  by  the  Emperor  of  the  East  and  the 
Bishop  of  that  city. 

About  this  time  the  most  learned  Bishop  of  his  age, 
Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  died.^ 

Such  a  name  ought  not  to  be  allowed  to  pass  with- 
out a  tribute  of  grateful  veneration.  If  it  had  not 
pleased  God  to  raise  him  up  for  the  work  which  he 
performed,  we  should  have  scarcely  known  anything 
of  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church  between  the 
end  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  and  the  Council  of 
Nicsea.  It  was  even  providential  that  his  historical 
method  was  not  more  scientific  than  it  was.  Happily 
for  the  Church,  he  was  content  to  be  a  literary  com- 
piler,  transcriber,  and  preserver  of  ancient  documents, 
and  to  build  his  fame  as  an  historian  on  industry 
rather  than  on  genius.  Whatever  judgment  may  be 
formed  of  his  theological  tenets  ^  (and  he  does  not 
seem  always  to  be  consistent  with  himself),  this  at 
least  must  be  recorded  to  his  honour,  that  he  does 
not  suppress  passages  of  authors  who  held  and  taught 
the  soundest  doctrines  on  such  articles  of  the  Faith 
as  the  Godhead  of  our  Blessed  Lord,  and  who  de- 
nounced those  who  denied  it.^ 

He  was  betrayed  into  excessive  obsequiousness  and 
servile  adulation  of  Constantine.  But  let  us  not 
forget   the  circumstances  and  temper  of  the  times. 

3  Socr.  ii.  4.  Sozomen,  iii.  2.  The  article  of  Bishop  Lightfoot,  in 
Prof.  Wace's  Diet.  pp.  308—348,  is  one  of  the  best  contributions  of 
modern  times  to  the  elucidation  of  the  character  and  works  of  Eusebius. 

■*  See  the  different  authorities  quoted  by  Bishop  Lightfoot,  p.  347, 
and  cp.  Fleury,  Hist.  iii.  p.  238. 

*  See,  for  example,  Euseb.  v.  28,  quoted  above,  vol.  i.  301. 


74  Character  of  Eusebiiis  of  Ccesarea — death  of 

Constanti?ie  II. 
Emperors  were  divinized.  Eusebius  had  known  and 
felt  what  Heathenism  was,  and  what  the  Church  of 
Christ  had  suffered  under  it,  and  from  what  it  had 
been  deHvered  by  Almighty  God  raising  up  Constan- 
tine  as  His  instrument  for  one  of  the  greatest  works 
in  the  history  of  mankind.  To  eulogize  Constantine 
was  to  bless  God^  Whose  agent  he  was.  To  panegyrize 
him  was  to  adore  Christ,  Whose  cross  he  had  placed 
on  the  military  standards  of  the  Mistress  of  the 
world. 

As  to  his  treatment  of  Athanasius,  it  cannot  be 
defended.  But  we  must  not  identify  Eusebius  with 
what  Arianism  became  in  the  days  of  Constantius 
His  silence  with  regard  to  the  proceedings  at  Tyre 
against  Athanasius,  may  be  charitably  construed  into 
a  sense  of  misgiving  as  to  their  fairness.  And  after 
the  deputation  to  Constantinople  from  Jerusalem,  his 
name  disappears  from  the  list  of  those  who  persecuted 
him.^     His  death  was  opportune  for  himself. 

About  the  same  time  occurred  another  death,  more 
disastrous  to  Athanasius  ;  that  of  Constantine,  one  of 
the  two  Western  Emperors,  who  unhappily  en- 
gaged in  a  strife  with  his  brother  Constans  concern- 
ing the  possession  of  Africa  and  Italy,  and  was  slain 
by  the  troops  of  Constans  near  Aquileia.  Thus 
perished  the  royal  benefactor  of  Athanasius.  Con- 
stans however,  who  thus  became  master  of  Gaul  and 
Spain,  and  other  countries   north   of  the   Alps,    be- 

*  It  has  been  supposed  by  some  (see  the  Preliminary  note  to  it  by 
Valesius  ;  cp.  Lightfoot,  p.  328)  that  the  Life  of  Constantine  by  Eusebius 
was  a  posthumous  work,  and  was  perhaps  edited  by  his  Arian  successor 
Acacius.  If  so,  it  passed  through  the  hands  of  one  who  was  more 
admired  for  ability  than  respected  for  honesty  (see  Cave,  Hist.  Lit. 
p.  206);  and  it  may  be  that  we  ao  not  possess  that  work  in  its  original 
form. 


Gregory  the  Cappadocia?!  sent  by  Constafitius  to  displace  7  5 
Athanasms. 
friended  him,  and  requested  him   to  supply  him  with 
some   copies  of  Holy  Scripture   for    his  use/  which 
were  sent  to  him  from  Alexandria. 

The  Eusebians  of  Constantinople,  being  disap- 
pointed in  their  hope  of  enlisting  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
in  their  cause,  and  in  their  attempt  to  supplant  Atha- 
nasius  by  sending  Pistus  to  Alexandria,  resolved  to 
dispense  with  the  aid  of  the  greatest  Church  of  the 
West,  and  to  act  on  the  support  and  encouragement  of 
the  Civil  power,  and  displace  Athanasius  by  its  means. 

In  the  first  instance  they  made  an  overture  to 
Eusebius  of  Edessa  (afterwards  celebrated  as  Bishop 
of  Emesa)  ;  but  he,  well  knowing  the  affection  of  the 
Clergy  and  People  for  their  Bishop,  Athanasius,  de- 
clined the  appointment  to  Alexandria.^ 

Gregory  of  Cappadocia,  formerly  a  friend  of  Atha- 
nasius, was  chosen  by  them  for  that  purpose.  Athana- 
sius ^  states  that  this  mission  of  Gregory  was  the  act 
of  the  Emperor  Constantius  himself,  acting  at  the 
instigation  of  the  Eusebians.  "They  resort  (he  says) 
to  the  Emperor,  and  appeal  to  him.  Have  pity  on 
our  failing  cause  (they  ask)  ;  all  are  deserting  us. 
Write  letters,  and  send  Philagrius  as  Praefect  to  Egypt, 
and  send  Gregory  as  Bishop  with  him."  Constantius 
therefore  wrote,  and  sent  Philagrius,  with  Arsacius  the 
Eunuch,  and  Gregory,  and  a  military  band.  Athana- 
sius has  described  the  scenes  of  cruelty  and  confusion 
which  ensued  at  Alexandria.     Without  any  canonical 

'  Athan.  Apol.  §  4.     See  above,  p.  45. 

*  Socr.  ii.  8,  9.  Sozomen,  iii.  6.  The  overture  to  Eusebius  of  Edessa, 
and  the  ordination  of  Gregory  of  Cappadocia,  and  his  intrusion  into  the 
See  of  Alexandria,  are  stated  by  Socrates  and  Sozomen  to  have  been 
acts  of  the  Council  of  Antioch  ;  but  there  are  chronological  objections 
to  this  statement,  and  it  is  not  borne  out  by  the  narrative  of  Athanasius, 

"  Athan.  Hist,  ad  Monachos,  §  9  and  §  10. 


76  Outrages  at  Alexandria. 

sanction,  with  no  suffrages  of  the  Bishops  and  Clergy, 
and  without  the  consent  of  the  people,  the  Eusebians 
had  consecrated  Gregory  to  the  See  of  Alexandria, 
and  sent  him  under  the  patronage  of  his  countryman 
Philagrius,  Prsefect  of  Egypt,  an  apostate  from  the 
faith,  aided  by  a  strong  military  force,  to  take  posses- 
sion of  it.  He  announced  to  the  people  that  Gregory 
was  coming  from  the  Court  of  Constantius  to  super- 
sede their  Bishop.  Sacrilegious  outrages  were  per- 
petrated in  the  Baptistery  and  at  the  altar  of  the 
Church  of  S.  Quirinus  at  Alexandria,  with  the  help 
of  an  infuriated  mob  of  heathens  and  Jews.  Virgins 
of  the  Church  were  vilely  used  ;  Monks  were  wounded 
and  murdered.  The  doors  and  railings  of  the 
Church  were  torn  off;  the  candles  of  the  Church  were 
lighted  in  honour  of  heathen  deities ;  the  sacred 
mysteries  were  profaned,  the  Holy  Books  were  burned, 
idolatrous  worship,  blasphemous  orgies,  obscene  bac- 
chanalian revelries  were  celebrated  in  the  hallowed 
precincts  ;  rapine  and  bloodshed,  and  the  most  licen- 
tious impurities  prevailed.^ 

These  outrages  were  committed  on  March  19, 
A.D.  340.  It  was  the  season  of  Lent ;  and  four  days 
afterwards  Gregory  entered  the  city  as  Bishop,  and 
testified  his  approval  of  what  Philagrius  had  done,  by 
joining  with  him  on  Good  Friday  in  the  savage  chas- 
tisement of  thirty-four  women  by  scourging.  He 
then  proceeded  to  another  Church  where  Athanasius 
usually  officiated,  in  order  that  he  might  arrest  and 
murder  him  ;  but  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria  was 
not  there  :  he  had  sailed  for  Rome. 

Other   enormities  were   perpetrated   by  Philagrius 

'  Athan.  Encyclic,  ad  omnes  Episcopos,  §  2  — §  5  ;  Hist.  Arian. 
§  10  ;   Apul.  §  30. 


Athanasius  at  Rome — Rise  of  Monastic  spirit  in  the  West.  77 

and    Gregory   on    Easter   Day   in    Alexandria, 
afterwards  in  various  Dioceses  of  Egypt. 

The  narrative  of  these  events  was  published  by 
Athanasius  himself,  in  his  "Encyclic  Epistleaddressed 
to  all  Bishops  in  every  place."  ^ 

Athanasius  was  courteously  received  by  Julius, 
Bishop  of  Rome,  who  resolved  to  convene  a  Synod 
in  order  that  his  cause  might  be  examined  ;  and  who 
sent  legates,  Elpidius  and  Philoxenus,  to  the  Eusebians 
to  invite  them  to  the  Council.^ 

Athanasius  was  accompanied  by  two  monks  of 
Egypt,  Ammonius  and  Isidorus,*  both  famous  for  their 
sanctity  ;  and  this  visit  was  memorable  for  giving 
occasion  to  the  spread  of  the  monastic  spirit  and 
discipline  (as  described  by  Athanasius  in  his  Life 
of  Antony  ^)  imported  from  the  East  ^  into  Rome 
and  Italy.  In  this  respect  the  banishment  of  Atha- 
nasius from  Alexandria  to  Rome  may,  as  we  shall 
hereafter  see,  have  been  the  cause  of  events  fruitful 
in  results  in  Church  History,  such  as  the  migrations 
of  S.  Jerome  and  Rufinus  and  their  companions  from 
Rome  to  Palestine,'''  and  the  foundation  of  the  monas- 
teries at  Bethlehem  and  on  Olivet. 

A  storm  was  now  gathering  which  was  about  to 
break  over  Christendom.     The  East  and  West  were 

-  As  to  its  trae  title,  see  Montfaucon's  Monitum  prefixed  to  it,  p.  86. 

3  Athan.  c.  Arian.  §  20 ;  Hist,  ad  Monachos,  §  ii. 

^  See  Socr.  iv.  23. 

^  See  above,  vol.  i.  pp.  430 — 438. 

^  In  accordance  with  this  importation  of  the  monastic  spirit  and 
usages  from  the  East  into  the  West,  it  is  worthy  of  remark  that  almost 
all  the  terms  connected  with  monastic  life  are  of  Eastern — and  not  of 
Western — origin.  Such  are  monasterium,  ccenobiu7n,  ascetce,  migades, 
anchorite,  hermit,  archimandrite,  &c.  Cp.  Abp.  Trench,  Study  of  Words, 
p.  126. 

7  S.  Jerome,  Epist,  96.     Rufin.  in  Jerome,  Apol.  ii.  420. 


78  Athanasms  supported  by  Consta?is,  Julius,  and  the  West. 

about  to  be  engaged  in  conflict.  Athanasius  was  at 
Rome.  The  Bishop  of  Rome,  JuHus,  was  a  man  of 
energy,  ability,  and  orthodoxy.^  The  Eastern  Euse- 
bians  rehed  on  the  secular  support  of  Constantius 
and  his  Court. 

Athanasius  had  lost  the  powerful  protection  of 
Constantine,  the  Western  Emperor,  who  was  now 
dead  ;  but  he  had  a  friend  in  his  brother  Constans  ; 
and  above  all,  he  was  strong  in  his  cause,  and  in  the 
support  of  the  Western  Church. 

The  policy  of  the  Easterns  was  brought  to  bear 
against  him,  not  only  with  ingenuity  and  dexterity, 
but  with  a  show  of  religion  and  loyalty,  which  made 
his  position  more  embarrassing. 

The  dedication  of  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre 
at  Jerusalem,  built  by  the  Emperor  Constantine,^  and 
reserved  for  Consecration  till  the  thirtieth  year  of  his 
reign,  in  order  to  give  greater  splendour  to  that 
anniversary,  had  been  made  the  occasion  and  the 
plea  for  the  assembling  of  the  Council  of  Bishops  at 
Tyre,  to  try  the  cause  of  Athanasius.  And  it  must 
have  been  a  severe  trial  to  him  to  find  that  he  could 
not  show  his  piety  to  God,  and  his  loyalty  to  his 
Sovereign,  by  taking  part  in  that  Council  in  the  year 
B.C.  335,  without  being  a  party  to  an  accusation  against 
himself  And  now,  in  A.D.  341,  another  bitter 
suffering  of  the  same  kind  awaited  him. 

The  fifth  anniversary  of  the  accession  of  the 
Emperor  Constantius  was  to  be  celebrated  by  the 
Dedication   of  the  magnificent    Church    (called    the 

8  For  a  specimen  of  these  characteristics  of  Pope  Julius,  see  his  noble 
Address  to  the  Eusebians  at  Antioch  in  Athan.  Apol.  c.  Arian.  §  21, 
pp.  Ill — 121. 

3  Athan.  Apol.  §  4. 


■Dedication  of  the  golden  Basilica  at  Antiocli—  7  9 

Council  tJiere. 
Golden  Basilica)  at  Antioch,  which  had  been  founded 
by  Constantine  ten  years  before.  Constantius  him- 
self with  his  royal  cortege  was  present.  Bishops 
from  all  parts  of  the  East,  ninety-seven  in  number 
came  to  this  great  solemnity.  The  Dedication  of  the 
Church  was  to  be  combined  with  the  holding  a 
Council  in  the  summer  and  autumn  of  that  y'^ear 
Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  was  there,  Acacius  of  Cssarea 
(the  successor  of  Eusebius),  Theodore  of  Heraclea 
Theognis  of  Nicaea,  Eudoxius  of  Germanicia,  Georo-e 
of  Laodicea,  Maris  of  Chalcedon,  and  other  leading 
Arians.  No  Western  Bishop  was  present.^  As  far  as 
numbers  were  concerned,  the  orthodox  Bishops  were 
in  a  small  majority;  but  the  Arians  under  the 
Imperial  influence  were  the  more  powerful  party. 

Athanasius  had  the  mortification  of  knowing  that 
the  design  of  many  in  this  great  assembly,  nominally 
convened  for  the  noblest  purpose,  was  to  crush  him 
and  subvert  the  Nicene  Faith.     As  the  historians  say 
''  Though  they  met  on  the  plea  of  consecrating  the 
Church,  yet  in  fact  their  design  was  to  abrogate  the 
decrees  of  Nic^a.^     When  all  the  Bishops  were  as- 
sembled, and  the  Emperor  Constantius  was  present 
many  of  them  began  to  accuse  Athanasius,  as  havin- 
violated  the  law  of  the  Church,  and  having  resumed 
his  place  at  Alexandria  before  he  had  been  reinstated 
in  his  see  by  a  Synodical  decree,  and  to  have  been 
guilty  of  acts  of  violence  on  his  return." 

They  were  aware  that  Athanasius,  and   his    able 
allies  in   the  West,  led  by  Julius,  Bishop  of  Rome, 

^  Socr.  ii.  8.     Sozom.  iii.  5. 

^  Sozomen.  iii.  5       Socr.  ii.  8.     These  historians  say  that  they  pro- 
ceeded to  offer  the  See  of  Alexandria  to  Eusebius  of  Edessa,  and,  on  his 
dechnms:  it,  to  ordain  Gregory  the  Cappadocian  to  it.      But  see  above 
p.  75,  note.     At  any  rate,  the  Emperor  was  the  principal  agent 


8o  Various  Creeds  of  the  Council  of  Antioch, 

were  watchful  observers  of  their  proceedings.  And 
they  had  many  Bishops  among  them  who  were  not 
infected  with  the  Arian  heresy.  The  Council  there- 
fore acted  with  caution  and  reserve,  and  spoke  in 
an  apologetic  tone.  They  put  forth  three  Confessions 
of  Faith,  in  none  of  which  did  the  crucial  term  con- 
substantial  appear.  In  the  first  they  disclaimed  the 
imputation  of  bein  followers  of  Arius ;  for  "  How," 
say  they,  "  can  we  who  are  Bishops  be  followers  of  a 
Presbyter?^  But  having  examined  his  faith,  we  have 
admitted  and  received,  rather  than  followed  him." 

They  then  proceeded  to  declare  their  belief;  but 
this  declaration  did  not  satisfy  them,  and  they  there- 
fore adopted  the  fuller  formula  which  they  ascribed 
to  the  holy  martyr  Lucian,  and  which  was  accepted 
by  all  the  Bishops,  ninety-seven  in  number ;  and 
which  was  afterwards  distinguished  by  the  title  of  the 
Creed  of  tJie  Dedication ;  and  which,  if  it  had  not 
been  intended  to  supersede  the  Nicene  Creed,  would 
have  been  unexceptionable. 

A  third  and  shorter  form  was  proposed  by  Theo- 
phronius.  Bishop  of  Tyana,  which  was  also  accepted 
by  the  Council,  and  to  which  the  same  character  may 
be  given.  S.  Hilary,  in  his  work  on  Synods  written  a 
few  years  afterwards,  speaks  with  charitable  allow- 
ance of  the  second  of  these  formulas.* 

The  temper  of  the  Council  may  also  be  inferred 
from  the  twenty-five  Canons  ^  which  it  framed.     Many 

3  Socr.  ii.  lo.     Sozom.  iii.  5. 

*»  S.  Hilary  de  Synod,  pp.  480—482  ;  he  thinks  that  the  Synod 
specially  designed  to  condemn  Sabellianism,  imputed  to  Marcellus  of 
Ancyra. 

5  They  may  be  seen  in  Concil.  General.,  Labbe,  ii.  pp.  562 — 587  ; 
Mansi,  ii.  1307;  Bruns,  Concil.  pp.  80—87;  and  see  Hefele,  Concihen- 
Geschichte,  i.  p.  513.     Pope  Innocent  I.  (Ep.  7  ad  Constant.,  a.d.  405) 


Cano7is  of  Coitncil  of  Antioch.  8 1 

of  them,  especially  those  on  Ecclesiastical  discipline, 
are  of  primary  importance.^  They  were  received  into 
the  Code  of  the  Canons  of  the  Universal  Church, 
and  deserve  careful  attention.' 

Canon  i  enforces  the  Nicene  Canon  on  the  observ- 
ance of  Easter. 

Canon  2  condemns  those  who  come  to  Church  and 
listen  to  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures,  but  do  not 
join  in  the  prayers  and  Holy  Communion.^  It  also 
condemns  those  ecclesiastics  who  communicate  with 
excommunicated  persons.^ 

Canon  3. — Against  clerical  non-residence. 

Canons  4  and  12  forbid  a  Bishop  who  has 
been  deposed  by  a  Council,^  or  a  Priest  or  Deacon 
deprived  by  his  Bishop,  to  intrude  into  their  ministry 
on  pain  of  not  being  restored  by  another  Council; 
and  if  a  person  deposed  by  his  Bishop  presumes  to 
importune  the  Emperor,  instead  of  appealing  to  a 
greater  Council,  he  shall  not  be  heard  and  reinstated. 
The  former  of  these  two  Canons  seems  to  refer  to  the 
case  of  Athanasius. 

rejected  these  canons  as  framed  by  heretics.  But  the  Easterns  accepted 
them  (see  Concil.Chalcedon,  act.  4),  and  they  are  contained  in  the  Codex 
Canonum  of  the  Greek  Church  ;  and  eventually  the  Latins  also  received 
them,  as  Pope  Zacharias,  Epist.  7.  They  are  given,  with  the  notes  of 
Balsamon  and  Zonaras,  in  Beveridge,  Synod,  i.  409. 

^  Some  learned  persons  have  propounded  an  hypothesis  that  these 
Canons  were  framed  by  a  different  Council  of  Antioch,  and  not  by  that 
which  put  forth  the  formulas  of  faith  ;  in  a  word,  that  there  were  two 
Councils  of  A?jtioch,  which  have  been  confounded  with  one  another  ; 
and  they  imagine  the  one  to  have  been  orthodox  and  the  other 
heterodox.  But  this  supposition  has  been  carefully  examined  and  satis- 
factorily disposed  of  by  Hefele,  Concilien-Geschichte,  i.  pp.  506 — 513. 

7  As  Fleurysays,  iii.  263,  **  Comme  la  discipline  en  etoit  sainte  et 
apostolique,  lis  furent  re9us  par  toute  I'Eglise." 

^  Cp.  above,  p.  65,  note,  and  Canon.  Apost.  9,  to  the  same  effect. 

^  Cp.  Canon.  Apost.  lo. 

^  Cp.  ibid.  29. 
VOL.   n.  G 


82  Canons  of  Antioch. 

Canons  5,  6,  7. — Against  schismatlcal  assemblies. 

Canon  8. — On  commendatory  Letters  [KavoviKal 
eTTLaToXal)  with  a  view  to  communion  in  other 
Dioceses.^ 

Canon  9. — On  the  relation  of  the  Suffragan  Bishops 
of  a  Province  to  their  Metropolitan. 

Canon  10. — On  Chorepiscopi  (or  what  are  now 
called  in  England,  not  correctly,  "Bishops  Suffragan.") 
They  may  appoint  Readers,  and  Sub-deacons,  and 
Exorcists  ;  but  may  not  ordain  Priests  or  Deacons 
without  the  consent  of  the  Bishop  in  whose  Diocese 
they  are.^ 

Canon  11. — Against  importunate  resort  of  Bishops 
or  Priests  to  the  Emperor  without  the  sanction  of 
their  Metropolitan. 

Canon  12. — See  above,  Canon  4. 

Canons  13,  21,  and  22. — Against  Bishops  who 
officiate  Episcopally,  without  due  permission,  in 
other  Dioceses  and  Provinces. 

Canons  14,  15. — On  judicial  proceedings  against 
Bishops,  in  cases  of  difference  of  votes. 

Canons  16,  [7,  18. — On  irregular  migrations  of 
Bishops  from  one  Diocese  to  another. 

Canon  19. — A  Bishop  may  not  be  consecrated  to  a 
Diocese  without  the  consent  of  the  Metropolitan  and 
the  suffrages  of  the  comprovincial  Bishops. 

Canon  20. — On  the  holding  of  Provincial  Synods 
twice  a  year.     Compare  the  Nicene  Canons,  Canon  5. 

Canon  21. — Against  the  Translation  of  Bishops  from 
one  Diocese  to  another.    Compare  Canon  15  ofNicaea. 

-  Cp.  Suicer,  Thesaur.  v.  KavoviKhs,  N.  ii. 

s  Tlie  importance  of  this  Canon  in  relation  to  Episcopal  Ordinations, 
and  the  13th  Canon  of  the  Council  of  Ancyra,  has  been  already 
noticed,  vol.  i.  p. 46  ;  and  see  Beveridge,  Synod. i.  386, 439.  Cp.  Hefele, 
Concilien-Geschichte,  i,  pp.  516,  773,  774. 


Canons  of  Council  of  Antioch — its  relation  to  Athanasiiis.    83 

Canon  22. — See  Canon  13. 

Canon  23. — A  Bishop  may  not  name  his  successor 
to  his  see.     This  also  may  refer  to  Athanasius. 

Canons  24  and  25. — The  Bishop  is  Trustee  of  the 
goods  of  the  Church,  in  conjunction  with  the  Priests 
and  Deacons ;  but  he  ought  to  dispense  them  in  the 
fear  of  God,  for  his  own  necessary  uses,  and  for 
those  of  his  brethren,  and  for  purposes  of  piety  and 
charity. 

The  4th,  I2th,  and  23rd  of  these  Canons  appear  to 
have  been  framed  (as  has  been  said)  with  an  eye  to 
the  case  of  Athanasius  ;  but  on  the  other  hand,  the 
2 1st  Canon  involved  a  censure  on  Eusebius  of  Nico- 
media,  who  had  been  translated  to  Constantinople. 

We  may  infer  from  this  Canon  that  the  influence 
of  Eusebius  was  on  the  wane.  Probably  he  was  in 
feeble  health.  In  the  year  after  this  Council  he  died  ;  * 
and  the  Catholic  Bishop  Paul,  who  had  been  ejected 
to  make  room  for  him,  was  chosen  by  the  orthodox 
party  in  his  stead.  The  Arians  set  up  Macedonius. 
Constantius  hastened  from  Antioch  to  Constantinople, 
and  ejected  Paul,  without  accepting  Macedonius. 

It  is  observable  also,  that  though  the  Council  of 
Antioch  framed  three  Canons  which  appeared  to 
affect  Athanasius,  yet  it  did  not  venture  to  condemn 
him  by  name — as  it  did  Marcellus  of  Ancyra — 
although  there  was  a  strong  party  against  Athanasius, 
with  the  Emperor  himself  at  its  head. 

The  language  of  the  three  Creeds  adopted  by 
the  Council,  especially  of  the  second  and  third,  is 
so  temperate  and  guarded,  and  the  action  of  the 
Western   Church  in  his  favour  was   so  powerful,  that 

^  Socr.  ii.  12.  Soz.  iii,  7.  Ath.  Apol.  §  36.  Before  the  arrival  of 
the  rescript  of  Julius  to  the  Bishop  of  Antioch. 

G    2 


84  Hopes  of  peace  in  the  Church  destroyed  by  the  temporal 

Power. 
hopes  might  then  have  been  entertained  of  restoration 
of  peace  to  the  Church. 

But,  as  we  have  already  seen/  steps  had  been  taken 
by  the  Civil  Power,  which  had  rendered  such  a  result 
very  difficult  of  attainment.  A  rival  Bishop,  Gregory 
the  Cappadocian,  had  been  sent  to  Alexandria  to 
supplant  Athanasius.  No  Bishops  of  Africa  had 
nominated  him  as  their  Metropolitan  ;  no  Clergy  had 
elected  him  ;  none  of'  the  people,  except  Heathens 
and  Jews,  had  welcomed  him.  He  had  been  thrust 
into  the  "  Throne  of  St.  Mark  "  by  the  force  of  his 
infidel  compatriot  Philagrius,  whose  sword  menaced 
his  opponents,  and  maintained  him  in  the  see. 

Some  historians,  ancient  and  modern,  have  supposed 
that  this  act  of  intrusion  was  due  to  the  Council  of 
Antioch  ;  but  (though  he  seems  to  have  been  ordained 
at  Antioch)  none  of  the  documents  in  the  works  of 
Athanasius  authorize  such  an  opinion  ;  and  modern 
investigations,  as  well  as  internal  evidence,  derivable 
from  the  Council  of  Antioch — particularly  from  some 
of  its  Canons — show  that  it  is  scarcely  tenable. 

When  Athanasius  had  reached  Rome,  Julius, 
Bishop  of  that  city,  sent  two  Presbyters,  Elpidius  and 
Philoxenus,  to  the  Bishops  who  were  at  Antioch,  and 
invited  them  to  Rome,  in  order  to  examine  the  case  of 
Athanasius.  These  Presbyters  left  Rome  early  in 
the  summer  of  a.d.  341. 

The  Eusebians  were  surprised  to  hear  that  Athana- 
sius was  at  Rome,  and  when  they  heard  that  the 
Council  proposed  by  Julius  was  to  be  a  purely 
Ecclesiastical  one,  and  would  not  be  subject  to  the 
influence  of  the  secular  power,  they  were  unwilling 
to  attend  it,  and  framed  another  Confession  of  faith, 

^  Above,  p.  75. 


Correspondence  hctiueen  the  Council  of  Antioch  and  Pope  85 
Julius. 
the  fourth  which  was  made  at  Antioch,  a  few  months 
after  the  three  preceding  ones.^ 

The  papal  legates  were  detained  at  Antioch  till 
January,  A.D.  342,  and  brought  with  them  a  reply 
from  the  Bishops,  written  in  a  spirit  of  haughty  re- 
monstrance^  Julius  kept  this  letter  for  some  time 
without  communicating  it  to  the  Western  Bishops, 
fifty  in  number,  assembled  at  Rome,  in  hopes  that 
some  emissaries  would  come  to  the  Roman  Council 
from  the  Bishops  at  Antioch,  and  modify  its  language. 
None,  however,  appeared.  He  therefore  laid  the 
letter  before  the  Synod,  which  proceeded  to  discuss 
the  matters  propounded  to  it  It  examined  seriatim 
the  charges  brought  against  Athanasius,  Marcellus 
of  Ancyra,  and  Asclepas  of  Gaza,  and  pronounced 
sentence  in  their  favour,  and  admitted  them  to  com- 
munion ;  and  authorized  Julius  to  write  a  Synodical 
letter  to  the  Eusebians,  and  to  announce  the  result  of 
its  deliberations  to  them.  This  he  did  in  the  autumn  of 
A.D.  342,  when  Athanasius  had  been  a  year  and  a  half  at 
Rome,  waiting  for  his  accusers  to  appear  against  him. 

The  letter  of  Julius  has  been  preserved  in  the 
Apology  of  Athanasius  ^  to  the  Arians,  and  reflects 
great  credit  on  his  firmness,  ability,  and  moderation. 
He  shows  the  invalidity  of  the  proceedings  against 
Athanasius  in  the  Synod  at  Tyre,  and  of  the  Mareotic 
Commission  ;  and  the  groundlessness  of  the  charge  of 

*  Athan.  Apol.  de  Synodis,  §  251. 

7  See  it  in  Socr.  ii.  15.  In  that  Letter,  written  by  the  common  consent 
of  all  (says  Socrates),  they  severely  rebuked  Julius  for  his  interference, 
and  for  claiming  to  have  a  right  to  depose  Bishops  without  any  reference 
to  them.  It  is  probable  that  the  orthodox  party,  having  taken  part  in 
framing  the  Canons,  had  quitted  Antioch,  and  that  this  letter  was 
written  by  the  remnant  who  were  Eusebians. 

8  Athan.  Apol.  §  21— §  35. 


86     Remonstrance  of  Julius  to  the  Eusebians  of  Antioch. 

the  "  broken  Chalice  '^  and  "  the  murder  of  Arsenius  ;" 
and  the  injustice  of  the  appointment,  first  of  Pistus,  a 
heretic,  and  secondly,  of  Gregory,  to  supersede  Atha- 
nasius  in  the  See  of  Alexandria.  "  Consider,"  he 
says,  **  which  of  the  two  parties  is  acting  against  the 
Canons?  We,  who  have  received  Athanasius  to 
communion,  whose  innocence  has  been  proved  to  us  ; 
or  they  who  have  ordained  at  Antioch^  a  Bishop  in 
his  place  for  Alexandria— a  distance  of  thirty-six 
stages  from  it— and  have  sent  him  with  a  military 
force  to  take  possession  of  the  see  ?  And  what  sort 
of  person  is  he  ?  A  stranger  to  his  flock,  who  was 
not  baptized  among  them,  and  was  unknown  to  most 
of  them,  and  was  not  asked  for  by  Presbyters,  or 
Bishops,  or  people  ;  and  who  was  sent  to  Alexandria, 
not  with  Priests  or  Deacons,  or  with  Bishops  of  Egypt, 
but  with  armed  men  ;  and  who,  when  he  arrived  there, 
was  guilty  of  barbarous  cruelties  and  sacrilegious 
outrages.  Which  of  the  two  parties  is  that  which 
kindles  the  flames  of  discord  ?  We,  who  mourn 
over  these  excesses,  and  have  compassion  on  our 
afflicted  brethren,  or  they  who  perpetrate  them  ?  Such 
things  as  these  do  not  lead  to  the  edification  of  the 
Church,  but  to  its  destruction  ;  ^  and  they  who  rejoice 
in  them  are  not  children  of  peace,  but  of  confusion.  I 
hear  that  there  are  some,  few  in  number,  who  are 
authors  of  these  evils  ;  and  I  beseech  you — you  who 
have  bowels  of  compassion — to  do  what  in  you  lies 
that  these  things,  which  are  contrary  to  the  rules  of  the 
Church,  may  be  corrected.  I  entreat  you,  by  Christ, 
not  to   suffer  His  members  to  be  torn  in   pieces.     If 

^  See  §  29,  §  30,  p.  118.  Gregory  was  therefore  ordained  by  Bishops 
at  Antioch;  but  not,  it  seems,  by  an  act  of  the  Synod:  Julius  says  the 
"  authors  of  the  evil  were  few."  ^  §  34. 


Letter  of  Julius  to  Antioch — his  appeal  to  Constaus.     87 

any  persons  were  in  fault,  letters  should  have  been 
sent  to  us  all,  in  order  that  what  is  just  might  have 
been  decided  by  all  ;  and  if  there  was  any  charge 
against  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  why  was  not  a 
communication  specially  sent  to  this  Church?  Are 
you  ignorant  that  such  is  the  custom  ?  that  a  letter 
should  have  been  addressed  to  us,  and  so  what  is  just 
should  have  been  decided  by  us  ?  ^  I  pray  you  to 
discourage  these  acts  of  injustice,  that  we  may  not 
be  a  laughing-stock  to  the  heathen,  and  provoke  the 
anger  of  God,  to  Whom  each  of  us  will  have  to  render 
an  account  at  the  Day  of  Judgment.  Would  to  God 
that  all  may  be  of  one  mind  according  to  His  Will, 
and  that  the  Churches,  having  their  Bishops  ^  restored 
to  them,  may  rejoice  for  ever  in  Jesus  Christ  our 
Lord.  Farewell,  dearly  beloved  brethren,  and  longed- 
for,  in  the  Lord." 

Julius,  perceiving  that  his  letter  had  little  effect 
with  the  Eusebians,  addressed  himself  to  the  Western 
Emperor  Constans,  who  wrote  to  his  brother  Con- 
stantius  in  the  East,*  and  requested  him  to  send  three 
Bishops  as  Commissioners  to  render  an  account  of 
the  deprivation  of  Athanasius.  Constantius  de- 
spatched four  from  Antioch  to  Gaul.  The  Bishop  of 
Treves,  Maximin,  asked  for  their  profession  of  faith  ; 

2  "  These  words  of  Julius  (says  the  Abbe  Fleury,  iii.  299)  are  to  be 
extended  to  all  the  Bishops  of  Italy,  and  perhaps  to  all  the  Bishops  of  the 
West.  Such  was  the  custom,  as  is  testified  by  S.  Ambrose  in  a  letter 
to  Theodosius  the  Great,  written  forty  years  after  the  letter  of  Julius." 
Ambrose,  Epist.  13. 

3  Besides  Athanasius,  many  other  Bishops,  expelled  from  their  sees 
for  their  orthodoxy,  had  resorted  to  Rome  :  Marcellus  of  Ancyra, 
Asclepas  of  Gaza,  Lucius  of  Adrianople,  Paul  of  Constantinople,  and 
others  from  Thrace,  Coele-Syria,  Phoenicia,  and  Palestine.  See  Mont- 
faucon,  Vit.  Ath.  p.  xl. 

■*  Socr.ii.  18.      Soz  iii.  10.     Ath.  de  Syn.  §  25.     Fleury,  iii.  299. 


88    The  ''Quicunqiie  Vulf"—the  ''Synopsis  of  Scripture /' 

Letter  to  Consta7itiiis. 
they  did  not  offer  the  Nicene  Creed,  but  presented  to 
Constans  the  fourth  formula  of  Antioch,  which  the 
Emperor  and  the  Bishop  would  not  accept. 

After  the  Roman  Synod  above  mentioned,  Athana- 
sius  continued  for  three  years  at  Rome.  The  tradi- 
tion^ now  justly  exploded,  that  the  "  Quiainque  Vidt''  ^ 
was  then  exhibited  by  Athanasius  to  Julius,  Bishop 
of  Rome,  has  so  far  an  historical  basis,  that  those 
three  years  were  spent  by  Athanasius  in  confirming 
the  Western  Church  in  the  doctrines  of  the  faith  set 
forth  in  that  formula.  There  is  also  a  tradition,  that 
at  this  time  Athanasius  drew  up  a  ^'  Synopsis "  (or 
Canon)  "  of  Holy  Scripture."  ^ 

In  A.D.  343,  the  fourth  year  after  his  arrival  at 
Rome,  Athanasius  received  from  the  Western 
Emperor  Constans  a  summons  to  Milan.  He  thus 
describes  the  circumstances  of  it,^  in  his  Apology  to 
Constantius,  who  had  charged  him  with  embroiling 
him  with  his  brother  Constans  : — 

"  I  did  not  know  why  I  was  sent  for,  and  I  learnt 
that  some  Bishops  who  were  there  had  requested  him 
to  write  to  your  Piety.  Believe  me.  Emperor,  so  the 
matter  was.  I  lie  not.  Having  come  to  Milan,  I 
experienced  his  great  kindness  ;  he  deigned  to  admit 
me  to  his  presence,  and  told  me  that  he  had  written 
to  you,  and  had  requested  you  that  a  Synod  might 
be  summoned.  While  I  was  sojourning  in  that  city, 
I  was   sent   back  by  him  to    Gaul ;  for   the    father 

'  See  Waterland  on  the  Athanasian  Creed,  Works,  iv.  241 — 261  ; 
Keble's  note  on  Hooker,  V.  xiii. 

^  See  torn.  ii.  p.  96,  ed.  Bened.  It  corresponds  with  the  Canon  of 
Laodicea  (see  below,  chap.  vi.).  The  genuine  Athanasian  ^^ Canon  of 
Scripture''''  is  in  his  "Festal  Epistle,"  torn.  i.  p.  767,  and  corresponds 
with  that  in  our  Sixth  Article.  See  Dr.  Westcott  on  the  Canon,  pp.  520, 
522.     It  will  be  referred  to  hereafter. 

"  Apol.  ad  Constantium,  §  4.. 


The  Westerns  are  content  with  the  Nicene  Creed — Coimcil  89 
of  Sardica. 

Hoslus  had  come  thither,  that  we  might  go  together 

to  Sardica  for  the  Council." 

In  the  year  344  ^  the  Eusebians  put  forth  a  fifth 
formula  (called  the  inacj^ostich  from  its  prolixity), 
which  they  sent  to  the  Western  Church.  In  it  also 
they  declined  the  use  of  the  word  constLbstantial^  and 
asserted  that  the  Son  is  like  the  Father,  and  is  true 
and  perfect  God,  but  had  a  beginning,  and  was  made, 
though  7iot  like  other  creatures? 

To  this  long  document  of  the  Eastern  Eusebians, 
the  Western  Bishops  gave  a  short  answer — that  they 
were  quite  satisfied  with  the  Nicene  Creed,  and  did 
not  want  any  other.  And  as  the  Eastern  Bishops 
refused  to  condemn  Arius,  the  Westerns  declined 
further  communion  with  them.^ 

Upon  this,  both  Emperors  agreed  to  summon  a 
Council  ;  and  Sardica  in  Moesia,  on  the  frontier  of 
the  two  Empires,  was  chosen  for  the  place  of  meeting. 
The  year  of  the  Council  was  probably  344.  It  num- 
bered about  170  Bishops,  from  more  than  thirty-five 
provinces  of  the  West  and  East  ;  ^  100  were  West- 
ern. Julius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  excused  himself  from 
attending,  on  account  of  his  diocesan  duties  ;  but 
he  sent  two  legates  to  the  Council.  Hosius,  the 
Bishop  of  Corduba,  who  had  taken  the  lead  in  the 
Council  of  Nicsea  in  A.D.  325,  was  President  also  at 
Sardica. 

Athanasius  came  to  meet  his  accusers.  Marcellus  of 
Ancyra,  and  Asclepas  of  Gaza,  attended  for  a  similar 
purpose.     The   leading    Eusebians  also    were    there.. 

8  For  this  date,  see  Athan,  de  Syn.  §  26,  and  Montfaucon,  p.  561. 
'•'  Athan.  de  Syn.  §  26.     Socr.  ii.  19.     Soz.  iii.  II. 
1  S.  Hilary,  Frag.  p.  673. 

"  On  this  Council,  see  Athan.  Apol.§  36;  ad  Monachos,  §  15— §  17  ; 
Socr.  ii.  20 ;  Soz.  iii.  11  j  Theodoret,  i.  7  ;  S.  Hilar.  Frag.  p.  622. 


90       Comicil  of  Sardica — adheres  to  the  Nicene  Creed. 

Theodore  of  Heraclea,  Acacius  of  Caesarea,  Eudoxius 
of  Germanicia,  and  the  celebrated  Ursacius  and 
Valens.  They  were  escorted  by  two  potent  civil 
officers,  or  Counts  (as  they  were  called),  Musonianus 
and  Hesychius. 

When,  however,  the  Easterns  perceived  that  the 
Council  would  be  regulated  by  purely  ecclesiastical 
laws,  and  that  the  officers  who  were  with  them  would 
not  be  allowed  to  exercise  any  influence  over  it,^ 
they  separated  themselves  from  the  Synod,  and  held 
their  sessions  apart  with  closed  doors,  in  a  palace 
where  they  lodged.  "  We,"  says  Athanasius,  "  ap- 
pealed again  and  again  to  them,  and  to  the  other 
Bishops,  and  said  to  them ;  '  Behold,  here  are 
Athanasius  and  his  friends,  whom,  when  they  were 
absent,  ye  accused.  Come,  therefore,  now,  and  convict 
them.*  "  Hosius,  the  President  of  the  Synod,  ad- 
dressed them  also  in  words  of  mild  and  dignified 
remonstrance.  But  being  stricken  in  conscience,  and 
not  expecting  to  find  Athanasius  there,  and  perceiv- 
ing that  many  were  there  who  brought  accusations 
against  them,  they  pleaded  that  the  Emperor  required 
their  presence  on  account  of  his  victory  in  Persia, 
and  suddenly  sounded  a  retreat  to  Philippopolis  in 
Thrace. 

The  Synod  at  Sardica  first  considered  the  question 
of  a  profession  of  faith.  After  some  discussion  on  the 
subject,  and  when  some  Bishops  urged  that  a  dogma- 
tic formula  should  be  framed  and  put  forth  by  the 
Council,  the  Synod  rejected  the  proposal  by  a  large 
majority,  and  resolved  that  it  would  adhere  wholly 
and  exclusively  to  the  Creed  of  Nicsea. 

They  next  proceeded  to  inquire  into  the  case  of 

3  Athan.  Apol.  §  36  ;  ad  Monachos,  §  15— §  17. 


Pronomices  in  favour  of  Athanasms :  condemns  his  91 
accusers  :  its  Synodal  letters. 
Athanasius,  and  after  a  careful  examination  of  the 
various  charges  against  him,  they  pronounced  him 
innocent,  and  declared  that  he  had  been  unjustly 
deposed,  and  received  him  to  communion. 

They  pronounced  a  like  sentence  on  Marcellus  ot 
Ancyra,  and  on  Asclepas  of  Gaza. 

They  also  condemned  their  accusers  as  guilty  of 
slander,  and  as  contumacious.  And  they  denounced  as 
schismatical  intruders,  and  not  to  be  regarded  as 
Bishops,  Gregory  of  Alexandria,  Basil  of  Ancyra,  and 
Quintian  of  Gaza.  They  also  condemned  and  deposed 
Theodore  of  Heraclea,  Narcissus  of  Neronias,  Stephen 
of  Antioch,  George  of  Laodicea,  Acacius  of  Caesarea, 
Menophantus  of  Ephesus,  Ursacius  of  Singidunum, 
and  Valens  of  Mursa. 

They  also  wrote  Synodical  letters,  giving  an  account 
of  their  proceedings,^  to  the  Priests  and  Deacons  and 
whole  Church  at  Alexandria ;  to  the  Bishops  in 
Egypt  and  Libya,  and  to  all  the  Bishops  of  the 
Catholic  Church  throughout  the  world.  These  letters 
were  subscribed  not  only  by  those  who  were  present, 
but  by  others  who  gave  their  adhesion  to  them,^  and 
the  signatures  amounted  on  the  whole  to  284 ;  to 
which  sixty-three  may  be  added,  says  Athanasius,^ 
who  communicated  their  approval  of  the  decrees  by 
private  letters. 

A  fourth  Synodical  letter  was  written  to  Pope  Julius, 
and  a  fifth  to  the  two  Emperors^  but  this  last  is  not 
extant. 

The  large  number  of  Bishops  subscribing  these 
Encyclics  of  Sardica,  is  a  proof  that  notwithstanding 

4  Inserted  in  Athan.  Apol.  §  37,  §  50;  S.  Hilar.  Frag.  pp.  622—  29 
^  Montfaucon,  p.  132. 
6  Apol.  §  50. 


9  2     Prevalence  of  the  Nicene  faith —  Canons  of  Sardica : 

Appeal  to  Julius,  Bishop  of  Rome. 
the  counteracting  influence  of  the  Eastern  Emperor, 
and  of  the  Bishops  swayed  by  him,  the  Nicene  Faith 
was   at  that  time  maintained  in  a  great  portion  of 
Christendom. 

The  Council  of  Sardica  framed  twenty  Canons, 
some  of  which  deserve  careful  attention."^  Most  of 
them  are  prefaced  by  the  words  "  Hosiiis  said!'  They 
were  proposed  by  him,  and  the  Synod  assented  to  them. 

Canons  i  and  2  are  against  the  translation  of 
Bishops,  and  agree  with  the  Council  of  Nicaea 
(Can.  15)^  and  with  that  of  Antioch  (Can.  21). 

Canons  3  and  5.^ — On  appeals  in  judicial  causes  of 
Bishops.  If  two  Bishops  of  the  same  Province  are  at 
variance,  neither  of  them  shall  appeal  to  a  Bishop  of 
another  Province. 

"  If  a  Bishop  has  been  condemned,  and  deems  his 
cause  to  be  good,  so  that  the  question  should  be 
renewed,  let  us  honour,  if  you  think  fit,  the  memory 
of  St.  Peter  the  Apostle,  and  let  those  who  have  pro- 
nounced judgment,  write  to  Julius,  Bishop  of  Rome, 
that  the  case  may  be  re-heard  by  the  Bishops  who  are 

''  See  Concil.  General,  ii.  627  ;  Beveridge,  Synod,  i.  482  ;  Brims, 
Concil.  pp.  89—105.  There  is  a  commentary  on  tliem  in  Hefele's 
Concilien-Geschichte,  i.  pp.  556— 605, who  (in  p.  557)  notices  the  fact  that , 
there  are  two  recensions  of  these  Canons,  one  in  Greek  and  another  in 
Latin,  and  is  of  opinion  that  they  were  originally  promulgated  in  both  lan- 
guages ;  but  these  recensions  differ  much  from  one  another,  and  it  seems 
hardly  probable  that  the  Council  itself  would  have  authorized  two  docu- 
ments with  so  many  discrepancies  between  them.  On  comparing 
Canon  3  in  the  Greek  with  the  same  Canon  as  it  stands  in  the  Latin  ; 
and  on  comparing  also  Canon  5  in  the  Greek  with  the  same  Canon  as  it 
is  in  the  Latin,  where  it  is  Canon  7,  the  reader  may  perhaps  be  inclined 
to  think  that  the  Latin  recensions  in  the  collections  of  Dionysius 
Exiguus  and  Isidore  Mercator  (in  Labbe's  Concilia,  ii.  643—658 ; 
Bruns,  pp.  90—92)  are  not  original  utterances  of  the  Synod,  but  are  more 
recent  editions  modified  in  the  interests  of  the  Roman  See, 

8  I  quote  the  numbers  of  the  Canons  as  they  stand  in  the  Greek.  In 
many  cases  I  have  only  given  a  short  summary  of  them. 


On  Appeals  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome.  93 

neighbours  to  the  Province,  and  let  him  appoint 
Judges  ;  but  if  he  does  not  deem  the  matter  to  be  such 
that  it  should  be  re-opened,  let  the  former  sentence 
stand  good." 

Canon  4. — If  a  Bishop  has  been  deposed  by  neigh- 
bouring Bishops,  and  he  declares  that  he  has  ground 
for  an  appeal,  let  not  another  Bishop  be  placed  in  his 
see,  unless  the  Bishop  of  Rome  %\.\r^  sentence  to  that 
effect. 

Canon  5.—"'  If  a  Bishop  shall  have  been  accused,  and 
the  Bishops  of  the  region  being  gathered  together 
shall  have  deposed  him  ;  and  \{  he  shall  have  fled,  as 
it  were,  an  appellant  to  the  most  blessed  Bishop  of 
Rome,  and  he  should  be  willing  to  hear  him,  and 
deem  it  just  to  renew  the  examination  of  his  cause  ; 
let  him  vouchsafe  to  write  to  the  brother-Bishops  who 
are  neighbours  of  the  Province,  that  they  should  dili- 
gently and  accurately  examine  each  particular,  and 
give  their  votes  on  the  cause,  according  to  the  truth 
of  the  matter.  And  if  any  one  deem  it  right  that  his 
own  cause  should  be  re-heard,  and  if  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  should  be  pleased  at  his  request  to  send  pres- 
byters ;  then  the  said  Bishop  may  be  authorized  to  do 
what  he  judges  and  decides  to  be  best ;  and  per- 
sons invested  with  his  authority  may  be  sent  by  him 
to  judge  concurrently  with  the  Bishops  of  the  Province; 
and  let  this  rule  be  made.  But  if  he  thinks  that  those 
Bishops  suffice  for  the  cognizance  of  the  matter,  and 
for  pronouncing  sentence,  let  him  do  as  seemeth  best 
to  his  most  prudent  judgment." 

These    Canons  have  been  quoted    as  authorizing 
Appeals  to  Rome. 

But  it  has  been  rightly  observed  by  some   Roman' 
Catholic  writers  (such  as  Archbishop  de  P^arca,  Dupin, 


94  On  Appeals  to  Rome. 

and  Quesnel  ^)  that  these  two  Canons  were  designed 
to  meet  a  special  case,  that  of  Athanasius,  and  to  give 
a  special  privilege  to  Julius,  the  then  Bishop  of  Rome  ; 
and  that  the  case  is  not  to  be  tried  at  Rome  by  the 
Bishop  of  Rome,  but  in  the  country  where  it  arose, 
and  by  the  Bishops  of  it,  and  that  Julius  may  send 
assessors  to  them. 

After  all,  the  question  is  of  comparatively  little 
importance,  inasmuch  as  the  Council  of  Sardica  was 
not  a  General  one ;  its  decrees  were  not  received  by 
the  Eastern  Church  ;  ^  and  Episcopal  Appeals  in  Epis- 
copal causes  were  afterwards  regulated,  as  we  shall  see, 
in  a  very  different  way  by  a  General  Council,  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon  (A.D.  451). 

We  may  add  that  it  would  have  been  an  unhappy 
thing  for  Athanasius  and  the  Faith  which  he  main- 
tained, if  his  cause  had  been  made  to  depend  on  the 
judgment  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome.  In  a  few  years 
afterwards,  namely  in  A.D.  357,  he  was  abandoned 
and  condemned  by  a  Bishop  of  Rome,  Liberius. 

Canons  8  and  20  are  against  Bishops  resorting  to 
the  imperial  Court  for  unworthy  purposes. 

^  Whose  words  are  quoted  by  the  author  of  the  present  work  in  his 
Theophilus  Anglicanus,  partii.  chap.ii.  See  also  the  proofs,  ibid,  part  iii. 
chap,  vi.,  tliat  the  Canon  Law  of  the  Ancient  Churcli  committed  the 
cases  of  Provincial  Bishops  to  the  judicial  cognizance  of  their  Metro- 
politans with  their  Suffragans  as  Assessors. 

The  Ultramontane  view  is  ably  maintained  by  Hefele,  Concilien- 
Geschichte,  pp.  561 — 571,  whose  statements,  however,  would  have  been 
more  likely  to  be  accepted,  if  they  were  not  grounded  on  a  funda- 
mental fallacy — viz.  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  has,  by  divine  right,  a 
claim  to  receive  appeals  from  every  part  of  the  Universal  Church,  and 
that  this  right  is  inherent  in  his  office,  and  independent  of  any  decrees 
of  Sardica  or  of  any  other  Council  (p.  570). 

I  As  to  what  constitutes  a  "General  Council,"  see  above,  vol.  i,  392. 
Cardinal  Newman  (on  the  Arians,  p.  468,  ed.  1876)  says  very  truly, 
"  Ecumenical  Councils  there  were  none  between  325  and  381." 


Canons  of  Sardica.  05 

Canon  10.— No  one  (a  rich  man  or  lawyer)  is  to 
be  consecrated  Bishop  without  being  first  ordained 
Reader,  Deacon,  and  Presbyter,  in  order  (according 
to  the  Apostoh'c  precept)  that  he  may  have  a  due 
time  of  probation. 

Canon  11. —If  a  Bishop  leaves  his  own  Episcopal 
city,  and  goes  to  another  with  views  of  ambition  and 
vain-glory,  and  if  the  Bishop  of  that  city  is  inferior  to 
him  in  learning,  let  him  not  despise  him,  and  preach 
too  often  there,  in  order  to  disparage  him,  and  to 
supplant  him  in  his  see.  It  is  necessary  to  limit  the 
time  of  such  non-residence.  You  may  remember  that 
in  a  former  Council,^  a  layman  was  deprived  of  com- 
munion if  he  omitted  to  come  to  his  Parish  Church 
for  three  successive  Sundays.  Much  more  ought  a 
Bishop  not  to  be  absent  from  his  own  Cathedral 
Church,  and  abandon  his  people,  without  stringent 
necessity. 

Canon  13. —A  deacon,  presbyter,  or  clerk,  excom- 
municated by  his  own  Bishop,  is  not  to  be  admitted  to 
communion  by  another. 

Canon  17.— If  a  Bishop  has  suffered  violence,  and 
has  been  unjustly  ejected  on  account  of  his  learning 
and  confession  of  the  Catholic  Faith,  or  for  his  vin"^ 
dication  of  the  truth  has  fled  from  danger,  and  come 
to  another  city,  let  him  not  be  hindered  from  dwelling 
there  till  he  has  found  a  deliverance  from  the  injury 
he  is  suffering  ;  for  it  would  be  harsh  and  v^ry 
grievous  that  one  enduring  banishment  wrongfully 
should  not  be  received  by  us  ;  nay,  rather  such  a  man 
ought  to  be  received  with  all  manner  of  benevolence 
and  humanity. 

This  Canon,  proposed  by  Olympius,  was  universally 

2  Perhaps  Elvira,  Canon  21. 


96         The  Council  sends  envoys  to  Constantius — TJie 

Donatists. 
accepted  by  the  Fathers  at  the  Council,  and  shows 
their  sentiments  with  regard  to  Athanasius. 

The  Council  of  Sardica  also  sent  two  Bishops  to 
Constantius,  Vincentius  of  Capua  and  Euphratas  of 
Cologne,  by  whom  it  announced  to  him  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  Synod.  The  envoys  were  fortified  with  a 
royal  letter  from  Constans  to  his  brother,  in  which  he 
conjured  him  to  restore  Athanasius  and  the  other 
banished  Bishops  to  their  sees,  and  even  threatened 
him  with  war  if  he  declined  to  do  so.^ 

About  this  time  Constans  attempted  also  to  heal 
the  Donatistic  Schism  in  Africa.  He  sent  two  envoys, 
Paul  and  Macarius,  to  Carthage,^  who  addressed  them- 
selves to  Donatus,  the  schismatical  Bishop  of  that 
city ;  but  they  were  denounced  as  persecutors  by  the 
Donatists,  who  were  guilty  of  cruel  excesses  and 
sacrilegious  outrages.  Some  of  the  most  violent, 
called  Circumcellions,  after  a  fit  of  phrensy,  com- 
mitted suicide,  and  were  honoured  as  Martyrs. 
Gratus,  the  Bishop  of  Carthage,*^  who  had  been  at 
Sardica,  and  was  much  esteemed  by  Hosius,  assembled 
a  Synod,  which  framed  fourteen  Canons.^  The  first 
was  against  rebaptization  of  any  who  had  been  once 
baptized  with  water  in  the  Name  of  the  Blessed 
Trinity.  This  was  the  more  important  as  bearing  on 
the  controversy  on  Baptism  in  the  days  of  S.  Cyprian,^ 
and  as  modifying  the  opinion  which  he  and  his 
brother-Bishops  in  Africa  had  enunciated  in  former 
Councils  on  that  subject. 


3  Socr.  ii.  22,  23.     Sozom.  iii.  20. 

4  Optatus,  lib.  iii.  8.     Augustin.  contra  Ep.  Farm.  i.  18. 

5  See  Concil.    General,  ii.    p.    713;  Bruns,   Concilia,  p.   in.     Cp. 
Hefele,  Concilien-Geschichte,  i.  p.  633. 

^  See  above,  vol.  i.  pp.    13 — 315. 


Canons  of  Carthage.  97 

Canon  2. — Against  honouring  as  Martyrs  those  who 
had  been  guilty  of  violence  and  suicide. 

Canon  5. — On  the  obligation  of  comnriendatory 
letters,  and  against  ordaining  persons  from  other 
Dioceses,  without  the  consent  of  their  Diocesan. 

Canon  11. — Against  contumacious  Clergymen. 
*'  Gratus  said,  *  It  is  clear  that  he  who  despises  humility 
is  not  a  man  of  God,  but  of  the  devil,  who  is  the 
author  of  pride.  If  any  one  is  contumacious,  let  him 
be  judged,  if  he  is  a  Deacon,  by  three  neighbouring 
Bishops  ;  if  he  is  a  Priest,  by  six  ;  if  he  is  a  Bishop, 
by  twelve  Bishops.'  All  the  Bishops  answered  that 
contempt,  contumacy,  and  pride  ought  to  be  crushed 
[frangi)  in  all  men  ;  and  let  the  cause  be  heard  by 
the  appointed  number  of  Judges." 

With  regard  to  this  Canon,  it  will  be  remembered 
that  in  the  North  African  Province,  in  which  Carthage 
was,  the  Dioceses  were  small,  and  the  Bishops 
numerous,  in  comparison  with  modernDioceses. 

After  the  Council  of  Sardica,  Athanasius  retired  to 
Naissus  in  Dacia,  quietly  waiting  the  result  of  the 
communication  from  Constans  to  his  brother.  He 
thence  went  to  Aquileia,  on  the  invitation  of  Constans, 
with  whom  he  was  a  fellow-worshipper  in  a  new 
Church,  and  with  whom  he  had  an  interview  in  the 
presence  of  the  Bishop,  Fortunatianus.'^ 

The  Eastern  Council  of  Arians  withdrew  from 
Sardica  to  Philippopolis  in  Thrace,  and  there  made 
reprisals    on   the  Westerns.     They  condemned    and 

'  Ad  Monachos,  §  21.  Apol.  §  54,  §  5.  Apol.  ad  Constantium,  §  3. 
It  was  providential  that  Athanasius  never  had  an  interview  with 
Constans  alone,  but  always  in  company  with  the  Bishop  of  the  city 
where  he  was  (Padua,  Verona,  Lodi,  Milan,  Treves),  because  he  was 
afterwards  traduced  to  Constantius  as  if  he  had  prejudiced  Constans 
against  him.     Montfaucon,  Vit.  p.  xlvii. 

.VOL.    II.  H 


98  Arian  reprisals :  Their  encyclic. 

excommunicated  Pope  Julius,  Hosius,  Athanaslus, 
Paul,  Marcellus,  Asclepas,  and  others  ;  and  wrote  an 
Encyclic  Epistle.^  It  is  addressed  to  Gregcjry,  the 
intrusive  Bishop  of  Alexandria  ;  to  Amphion,  Bishop 
of  Nicomedia  ;  and  to  Donatus,  the  leader  of  the 
schismatics  in  Carthage ;  ^  and  to  all  Bishops,  Priests, 
and  Deacons  of  the  Catholic  Church  ;  and  purports 
to  come  from  a  Council  which  they  have  held  at 
Sardica. 

In  this  Epistle  they  reiterated  the  charges  against 
Athanasius,  which  they  had  not  made  in  his  pre- 
sence at  Sardica,  when  challenged  to  do  so.  They 
accuse  Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  Paul  of  Constantinople, 
and  Asclepas  of  Gaza  as  heretics.  They  complain 
of  Julius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  as  ringleader  of  evil  men, 
and  opening  the  door  of  communion  to  condemned 
malefactors  ;  and  they  stigmatize  Hosius  as  uncanoni- 
cally  claiming  jurisdiction  over  Bishops  in  the  East  ; 
and  they  say,  "  We  openly  command,  most  dearly 
beloved  brethren,  that  none  of  you  ever  communicate 
with  Hosius,  Protogenes,  Athanasius,  Marcellus,  As- 
clepas, Julius."  This  letter  is  subscribed  by  Stepha- 
nus  Bishop  of  Antioch,  Menophantus  of  Ephesus, 
Theodore  of  Heraclea,  Acacius  of  Csesarea,  Demo- 
philus  of  Beroea,Valens  of  Mursa,  and  others,  alto- 
gether seventy-three  in  number.^ 

They  also  put  forth  a  creed,^  which  is   Catholic  in 

8  See  Concil.  General,  ii.  698—712,  where  the  Council  is  called 
**  Conciliabulum  "  and  "pseudo-Synodus."  It  is  preserved  by  S.  Hilary, 
p.  647,  as  there  quoted. 

9  In  Augustine's  time  Cresconius  the  Donatist  appealed  to  this  letter 
as  an  Epistle  of  the  Council  of  Sardica,  and  was  refuted  by  Augustine 
(ad  Crescon.  iii.  34). 

1  In  the  Epistle,  p.  705,  they  say  **nos  octoginta  numero"  came  to 
Sardica.     Some  fell  off  from  them. 

2  Ibid.  p.  710  J  and  S.  Hilary  de  Synodis,  p.  482;  Frag.  p.  664. 


The  East  divided  from  the  West :  and  the  East        99 
divided  in  itself. 
its  language,  but  is  liable  to  the  grave  objection  that  it 
was  designed  to  supersede  that  of  Nicaea,  which  was 
maintained  by  the  true  Synod  of  Sardica. 

"  Think  not  that  I  came  to  send  peace  on  earth," 
was  our  Lord's  prophetic  declaration  :  "  I  came  not 
to  send  peace,  but  rather  a  sword  (Matt.  x.  34).  This 
saying  was  now  fulfilled.  The  East  was  divided 
from  the  West.  The  West  was  united  ;  but  the  East 
was  divided  in  itself. 

There  were,  however,  cheering  circumstances  in 
this  division.  It  brought  out  more  clearly  essential 
principles  of  true  union.  The  Athanasians  and  their 
bitterest  opponents  were  united  in  recognizing  the 
Veracity  and  Inspiration  of  Holy  Scripture.  Both 
appealed  to  it  as  divine.  Both  recognized  the  Chris- 
tian Sacraments,  and  the  one  Apostolic  form  of 
Church  Government  ;  both  concurred  in  condemning 
Photinus'  and  his  doctrine  that  Christ  was  merely 
man.  Arianism,  which  has  led  to  Socinianism,  would 
have  disclaimed  its  own  offspring. 

But  an  unexpected  incident  now  occurred,  which 
turned  the  tide  of  affairs. 

The  Emperor  Constantius  was  at  Antioch.  Vin- 
cent of  Capua,  and  Euphratas  of  Cologne,  the 
Episcopal  delegates  to  him  from  the  Council  of  Sar- 
dica above  mentioned,  had  arrived  there  at  Easter,  with 
the  missives  from  the  Council  and  the  letter  of  his 
brother  Constans,  desiring  him — not  without  menacing 
words — to  restore  Athanasius  and  the  banished  Bishops 
to  their  sees. 

The  two  Bishops  were  lodged  in  the  same  house  at 

**This   symbol,"  says   Fleury,  p.  338,  **n'a  rien  de  remarquable    que 
romission  afifectee  de  constibstantitl.'''' 

^  The  West  at  Milan,  the  East  at  Sirmium. 
H  2 


loo  VinceJitius  and  Euphratas  at  Antioch. 

Antioch,  in  adjoining  rooms.  At  night-time  one  of 
them  was  startled  by  the  appearance  of  a  woman, 
who  was  no  less  astonished  to  see  an  aged  man  in 
his  bed.  A  clamour  arose  from  both.  She  was  a  harlot 
of  that  city,  having  been  suborned  by  a  ruffian 
called  Onager,  who  had  not  told  her  whom  she  would 
find  there,  and  who  with  some  fifteen  accomplices 
was  lying  in  wait  near  the  house.  They  rushed  in,  and 
he  endeavoured  to  induce  the  woman  to  affirm  that  she 
had  been  sent  for  by  Euphratas  and  his  companion. 
But  she  refused  to  do  so  ;  the  plot  was  discovered, 
and  brought  before  Sulianus,  the  military  commander 
of  the  city  ;  and  from  him  it  came  to  the  ears  of  the 
Emperor.*  On  inquiry,  the  conspiracy  was  traced  to 
Stephanus,  the  Arian  Bishop  of  Antioch,  whose  name 
stands  at  the  head  ofthe  seventy- three  who  subscribed 
the  Encyclic  of  Philippopolis. 

Such  a  conspiracy  as  this  revealed  the  animus  of 
some  who  had  been  led  by  the  Bishop  of  Antioch  ; 
and  is  an  evidence  of  their  unscrupulousness  in  fabri- 
cating calumnies  against  Athanasius  and  his  friends, 
and  of  the  malignity  by  which  they  were  actuated 
against  them.  But  good  came  out  of  evil.  The 
Emperor  Constantius  drew  the  reasonable  inference 
from  this  specimen  of  injustice  and  calumny. 

Stephanus,  who  had  taken  the  lead  at  Philippo- 
polis in  deposing  the  Catholic  Bishops,  was  himseli 
deposed  by  judicial  sentence  at  Antioch.^ 

Constantius,  rightly  conjecturing  that  he  had  been 
deceived  by  his  Arian  advisers,  and  also  stirred  by  the 
grand  manifesto  of  the  Bishops  at  Sardica,  and  by 
the  energetic  appeal  of  Constans  ;  and  moved,  we  may 

4  See  Athan.  Hist.  Arian.  ad  Monach.  §  lo.     Theodoret,  ii.  7. 

5  Theodoret,  ii.  8. 


Cojistantms  a  suppliant  to  Athanasiiis.  loi 

believe,  by  commiseration  for  long  and  unmerited 
suffering,  and  by  admiration  of  fortitude  and  firm- 
ness of  character,  made  a  sudden  and  entire 
change  for  a  time  in  his  conduct  to  Athanasius  ; 
and  the  Emperor  who  had  been  his  persecutor,  and 
had  driven  him  from  Alexandria,  now  became  his 
suppliant,  and  entreated  him  to  return  to  it ;  and  he 
who  had  been  threatened  by  Constans,  now  requested 
Constans  to  allow  Athanasius  to  come  to  him,  that  he 
might  restore  him  to  his  see. 

Another  no  less  unexpected  event  helped  to  turn 
the  tide  in  the  same  direction.  Ten  months  after 
the  deposition  of  Stephanus  of  Antioch,  Gregory, 
who  had  been  intruded  by  the  civil  power  into  the 
See  of  Alexandria,  and  was  guilty  of  cruel  enormi- 
ties, had  exasperated  the  people  of  Alexandria  by 
his  barbarities,  and  was  killed  by  them  in  a  popular 
insurrection  ;  and  thus  the  way  was  cleared  for  a 
return  of  its  lawful  Bishop  ^  to  that  city. 

Constantius  addressed  three  letters  to  Athanasius  ^ 
as  follows  : — "  Our  clemency  no  longer  allows  thee  to 
be  tossed  about  by  the  wild  waves  and  stormy  sea — 
thee,  who  hast  been  driven  from  thy  home,  and  spoiled 
of  thy  goods.  Although  I  deferred  writing  to  thee,  be- 
cause I  hoped  that  thou  wouldst  come  to  me  of  thine 
own  accord,  and  ask  for  a  respite  from  thy  labours, 
yet  since  perhaps  fear  hath  deterred  thee  from  com- 
ing, I  send  to  thy  fortitude  this  letter  full  of  bene- 
volence, in  order  that  thou  mayest  come  to  my  pre- 
sence, and    attain  thy  desire,   and    experience   my 

6  Theodoret,  ii.  9.     Athan.  Hist.  Arian.  §  21. 

^  Preserved  by  Athan.  Apol.  §  51,  p.  134;  Socr.  ii.  2-^.  In 
the  translation  of  this  and  the  following  letters,  some  paragraphs  are 
abridged,  and  others  are  paraphrased. 


I02  Letters  of  Constantius  to  Athanasius — Letter  of  Julius. 

goodness^  and  be  restored  to  thy  home.  And  for 
this  cause  I  have  requested  my  Lord  and  brother 
Constans,  Victor,  Augustus,  on  thy  behalf,  to  allow 
thee  to  come  to  me,  in  order  that  by  the  authority 
of  us  both,  thou  mayest  be  restored  to  thy  country, 
and  obtain  this  pledge  of  our  favour." 

In  the  second  letter,  the  Emperor  offers  him  the  use 
of  the  public  carriages,  and  desires  him  to  come  as 
quickly  as  he  can. 

In  the  third,  he  expresses  his  surprise  that  Athana- 
sius has  not  come  to  him,  and  sends  a  deacon  with 
a  letter  to  him,  signifying  his  desire  that  he  would 
hasten  to  him,  and  so  be  restored  to  his  own  country. 

"  When  I  received  these  letters  of  the  Emperor," 
says  Athanasius,  "  I  was  at  Aquileia  ;  and  on  receiv- 
ing them,  I  returned  to  Rome,  that  I  might  bid  fare- 
well to  the  Church,  which  was  filled  with  joy  by  the 
news ;  and  Julius,  rejoicing  in  my  return,  wrote  a  letter 
to  the  Church  of  Alexandria  ;  and  the  Bishops,  in 
our  progress  thither,  received  me  everywhere  with 
peace." 

The  letter  of  Julius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  was  as 
follows  :  ^ — 

"Julius  to  the  priests,  deacons,  and  people  of 
Alexandria.  I  rejoice  with  you,  beloved  brethren,  that 
you  behold  with  your  eyes  the  fruit  of  your  faith.  Any 
one  may  see  this  realized  in  our  brother  and  fellow- 
Bishop,  Athanasius,  whom  God  now  restores  to  you 
on  account  of  the  holiness  of  his  life,  and  your  prayers. 
Clear  it  is,  that  you  have  offered  to  God  for  him 
supplications  full  of  piety  and  love.  You  remem- 
bered the  divine  promises,  and  that  training  which 
leads  to  their  attainment,  in  which  you  were  nur- 

8    Athan.  Apol.  §  52,  p.  135. 


Letter  of  Pope  Julius  to  the  Alexandrine  Church.     103 

tured  by  our  brother's  teaching  ;  and  ye  have  been 
persuaded  by  a  sound  faith  that  he  whom  ye  bore 
ever  in  your  hearts  would  not  always  be  parted  from 
your  eyes.  I  need  not  write  much  ;  your  own  faith 
anticipates  what  I  have  to  say,  and  has  fulfilled  our 
common  desire  through  God's  grace.  I  rejoice  there- 
fore with  you  that  you  have  kept  your  minds  uncon- 
querably settled  in  the  true  faith  ;  and  I  rejoice  no 
less  with  my  brother  Athanasius,  in  that  while  he 
was  suffering  many  hardships,  he  was  not  unmindful 
of  your  love  for  a  single  hour.  For  though  absent  in 
body,  he  was  present  with  you  in  spirit.  He  is  now 
returning  to  you,  much  more  glorious  than  when  he 
left  you.  If  precious  metals,  such  as  silver  and  gold, 
are  tried  by  the  fire,  what  can  be  worthily  said  of  so 
great  a  man,  who  has  overcome  the  perils  of  so  many 
afflictions,  and  who  returns  to  you  having  been 
declared  innocent,  not  only  by  us,  but  by  the  judg- 
ment of  the  whole  Synod  ?  Receive  therefore, 
beloved  brethren,  with  all  joy,  and  glory  to  God,  your 
Bishop  Athanasius." 

He  then  describes  by  anticipation  the  gladness  and 
exultation  with  which  they  will  welcome  him  at 
Alexandria,  and  tells  them  that  he  shares  their  joy, 
and  realizes  it,  inasmuch  as  he  has  had  the  privilege, 
which  God  had  given  him,  of  knowing  such  a  man. 

"  Let  us,"  he  adds,^  "  as  in  duty  bound,  close  this 
letter  with  prayer.  May  God  Almighty  and  His  Son, 
our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  grant  to  you  His 
perpetual  grace,  and  crown  the  admirable  faith  which 

3  Some  paragraphs,  still  more  laudatory  of  Athanasius,  and  con- 
demnatory of  his  Arian  enemies  and  persecutors,  are  contained  in  the 
copy  of  this  letter  of  Julius  which  is  preserved  by  Socr.  ii.  23  ;  but  they 
are  omitted  by  Athanasius  himself— an  interesting  fact,  as  showing  his 
modesty  and  charity. 


104  Letter  of  Julius — Letters  of  Constafitius. 

you  have  shown  with  regard  to  your  Bishop,  by  a 
glorious  testimony.  May  He  grant  you  and  your 
posterity  in  this  world  and  the  next  those  good  things 
which  eye  hath  not  seen,  nor  ear  heard,  nor  have 
entered  into  the  heart  of  man,  which  God  hath  pre- 
pared for  them  that  love  Him,  through  Jesus  Christ 
our  Lord  ;  by  Whom  be  glory  to  God  Almighty  for 
ever  and  ever.     Amen. 

Farewell  in  the  Lord,  dearly  beloved  brethren." 
The  Emperor  Constantius  also  addressed  a  letter  ^ 
on  behalf  of  Athanasius  to  the  Bishops  and  Priests 
of  the  Catholic  Church,  in  which  the  Emperor  bears 
a  striking  testimony  to  his  innocence  and  patience, 
and  also  to  the  soundness  of  his  faith. 

"  The  most  reverend  Athanasius  has  not  been  left 
destitute  of  God's  favour,  inasmuch  as,  although  for 
a  short  time  he  has  been  subject  to  trial,  he  has  re- 
ceived the  merited  suffrage  of  approval  from  Divine 
Providence  which  sees  all  things ;  and  he  has  been 
restored  by  God's  will  and  by  our  judgment  to  his 
country,  and  to  the  Church  over  which  by  God's 
appointment  he  presides.  He  ought  to  receive  his 
deserts  from  our  clemency.  All  decrees,  therefore, 
that  were  heretofore  framed  against  those  who  com- 
municated with  him,  are  now  to  be  consigned  to 
oblivion, and  all  suspicion  against  them  to  be  abolished; 
and  all  immunities  are  to  be  confirmed  which  were 
enjoyed  by  the  Clergy  in  his  communion.  And  let 
all  Ecclesiastics  take  notice  that  the  safety  of  all  who 
have  adhered  to  him  is  assured  to  them.  Commu- 
nion with  Athanasius  shall  be  adjudged  to  be  suffi- 
cient proof  of  soundness  of  faith  ;  and  we  have 
ordered  that  all  who,  by  reason  of  their  better  judg- 

^  Athan.  Apol.  §  54,  p.  136. 


Letters  of  Constafitius— Return  of  Athanasius.       loi^ 

ment    and  condition,  choose  his    communion,   shall 

enjoy  similar  favour  from  us.     May  God  have  you  in 

His  keeping." 

Constantius  also  wrote  a  letter  to  "  the  people  of  the 

Catholic  Church  of  Alexandria."  ^  He  was  aware,  he 
says,  that  they  had  long  been  destitute  of  the  care 
of  their  Bishop,  and  therefore  he  sends  to  them  their 
Bishop  Athanasius  again,  ''  a  man  known  to  all  for 
his  rectitude  of  life  and  conversation  ;"  and  he  exhorts 
them  to  receive  him  with  their  whole  heart  and  soul, 
in  peace,  and  to  co-operate  with  him  in  prayers,  in 
order  that  the  heathen  may  be  converted  by  their 
good  life  to  the  true  faith.  "  I  have  given  orders,"  he 
says,  "  to  the  secular  magistrates  to  repress  all  sedi- 
tion and  riot  among  you  ;"  and  he  exhorts  them  to 
dwell  in  concord  and  brotherly  love.  In  addition  to 
this,  Constantius  gave  orders  that  whatever  things, 
being  deceived  by  the  calumnies  of  the  Eusebians,  he 
had  written  against  Athanasius/  should  be  effaced 
from  the  public  records  by  the  Duke  and  Prefects 
of  Egypt ;  and  they  were  cancelled  accordingly.  He 
also  sent  letters  to  the  Praefects  of  Thebais  and  Libya, 
in  which  he  commanded  that  all  such  edicts  should 
be  expunged  by  them,  and  that  all  who  communicated 
with  Athanasius  should  be  restored  to  their  former 
privileges. 

Athanasius  now  proceeded  homewards;  he  saw 
Constans  again ;  passed  through  Hadrianople  ^— where 
he  beheld  the  graves  of  laymen  who  had  been  killed 
by  Arian  Bishops— to  Antioch,  where  he  was  graciously 
received  by  Constantius,^  who  sent  from  Antioch  the 

2  Athan.  Apol.  §  55,  p.  137.  3  ibid.  §  56,  p.  137. 

*  Hist.  Arian.  §  18,  §22.  »  :>  '  i^     0/ 

'  Apol.  ad  Const.  §  5  ;  Hist.  Arian.  §  22,  §  44.   Socr.  ii.  23.    Theo- 
doret,  li.  9.     Sozom.  iii.  20. 


io6     Retur7i  of  Athanasiiis — Sy  nodical  letter  of  Jerusalem. 

letters  to  Alexandria  which  have  been  already  in- 
serted. At  Antioch  he  did  not  communicate  with 
the  Arian  Bishop  Leontius,  but  with  the  Eusta- 
thians,  so  called  from  their  former  Bishop  and  Con- 
fessor. When  he  was  at  Antioch,  the  Emperor  asked 
him  to  grant  a  Church  at  Alexandria  to  the  Arians, 
which  he  promised  to  do  on  the  condition  that  the 
Arians  should  grant  to  the  Eustathians  a  Church  at 
Antioch.  The  Emperor  approved  the  request,  but 
the  Arians  would  not  accede  to  it. 

From  Antioch  Athanasius  went  to  Jerusalem, 
where  a  Council  of  Bishops,  with  Maximus,  Bishop  of 
Jerusalem,  at  their  head,  was  assembled  to  do  him 
honour,  and  addressed  a  congratulatory  Synodical 
Epistle  in  his  favour  to  the  Bishops  of  Egypt,  and  to 
the  Priests,  Deacons,  and  Laity  of  Alexandria.^ 

"  We  cannot,"  they  say,  "  adequately  thank  the 
Lord  of  all  for  the  wonders  which  He  works  every- 
where, and  especially  for  your  Church,  inasmuch 
as  He  restores  to  you  your  Pastor  and  our  fellow- 
minister  Athanasius.  For  who  ever  hoped  to  see 
those  things  which  ye  now  enjoy  ?  Your  supplica- 
tions have  been  heard  by  the  Lord  of  all,  Who  takes 
care  of  so  great  a  Church  as  yours,  and  beholds  your 
tearSj  and  has  answered  your  prayers.  Behold,  we  are 
sharers  in  your  love,  and  have  embraced  him  before 
you,  and  have  held  communion  with  him,  and  send 
this  greeting  to  you.  It  is  your  part,  therefore,  to 
pray  for  the  piety  of  the  most  religious  Emperors, 
who,  in  regard  for  your  desire  and  for  his  innocence, 
which  they  now  recognize,  have  willed  to  restore  him 
with  all  honours  to  you.     Therefore,  receive  him  with 

^  Concil.  General,  p.  726.  Athan.  Apol.  §  57  ;  Hist.  Arian.  ad 
Mon.  §  25. 


Ursacius  and  Vale?is  reca?it.  107 

open  arms,  and  render  hearty  thanks  to  God,  the  Giver 
of  this  blessing,  and  alway  rejoice  in  God  and  glorify 
Him  in  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  through  Whom  be 
glory  to  His  Father  for  evermore." 

Athanasius  says  ^  that  some  Bishops  who  had 
formerly  assented  to  his  condemnation,  recanted  ;  and 
that  all  the  Bishops  of  Palestine,  with  two  or  three 
exceptions  (such,  probably,  as  Acacius  of  Caesarea,  and 
Patrophilus  of  Scythopolis),  communicated  with  him. 

Even  Ursacius  and  Valens,  his  two  bitterest  enemies, 
sent  a  penitential  submission  in  writing  to  Julius,  in 
which  they  condemned  Arianism  and  its  partisans  as 
heretical,  and  acknowledged,  in  the  presence  of  their 
Clergy,  that  the  accusations  in  which  they  had  joined 
against  Athanasius  were  calumnious  and  false.^  A 
copy  of  this  submission  was  sent  to  Athanasius  in 
Latin  by  the  Bishop  of  Treves. 

Ursacius  and  Valens  also  sent  a  letter  to  Athana- 
sius, in  which  they  professed  themselves  to  be  in 
communion  with  him,  and  requested  a  similar  assur- 
ance from  him. 

He  came  to  Alexandria  on  Oct.  21,  A.D.  346.^ 
Universal  joy  was  diffused  by  his  return.  "  Who,''' 
he  says,  "  that  beheld  such  peace  in  our  Churches_, 
did  not  wonder  at  the  sight .?  ^  Who  was  not 
gladdened  by  the  concord  of  so  many  and  great 
Bishops  ?  Who  did  not  glorify  God  for  the  joy  of 
the  people  in  the  assemblies  of  the  Church  }  How 
many  enemies  repented  of  their  hate  !  How  many 
calumniators    apologized    for   their    slander !     How 

7  Ad  Mon.  §  25  ;  Apol.  §  57. 

'^  Apol.  §  58 ;  Hist.  Arian.  ad  Mon.  §  26.  Socr.  ii.  24.  Sozom.  iii. 
23,  24. 

^  This  is  the  date  according  to  the  Festal  Index. 
^  Hist.  Arian.  §  27. 


io8  Return  of  Athanasius  to  AIexa?idria, 

many  exchanged  hatred  for  love  !  How  many  who 
had  formerly  been  partisans  of  Arianism,  not  by  con- 
viction but  by  coercion,  came  and  asked  for  pardon, 
and  said  that  while  in  bodily  presence  they  were  with 
the  Arians,  they  were  in  heart  with  Athanasius !  " 

He  also  speaks  of  the  religious  change  produced 
among  all  classes  by  this  event.^ 

Gregory  Nazianzen^  describing  this  return  in  one 
of  his  orations,""*  says,  "  That  noble  athlete  Atha- 
nasius came  back  to  his  own  city  from  his  glorious 
pilgrimage  (such  his  flight  was,  for  it  was  to  the 
honour  of  the  Blessed  Trinity,  and  with  its  guidance), 
and  he  found  all  the  city,  nay,  almost  all  Egypt, 
transported  v/ith  joy,  and  flowing  together  from  all 
parts  to  one  place,  and  mounted  on  every  high  place, 
to  catch  a  glimpse  of  Athanasius,  or  the  sound  of  his 
voice,  or  even  the  passing  by  of  his  shadow.  The 
glory  of  Athanasius  seemed  to  eclipse  that  of  the 
Emperor  himself,  such  was  the  veneration  for  him. 
Both  sexes,  all  families  and  professions,  vied  in  paying 
honour  to  him.  They  were  like  a  river — a  poet  would 
call  them  a  Nile — flowing  with  gold,  and  fruitful  with 
corn,  and  ebbing  backward  from  the  city  a  day's 
journey  to  Choereus,'*  and  farther.  He  was  riding 
meekly  on  a  foal  :  the  crowd  welcomed  him  with  plau- 
dits and  acclamations.  Sweet  perfumes  were  poured 
forth  ;  the  city  blazed  with  lights  in  the  night ;  and 
public  and  private  banquets,  and  all  other  signs  of 
public  rejoicing,  hailed  his  return.  He  proceeded  to 
the  Church.  No  symptoms  of  passion  were  apparent 
in  his  demeanour  against  any.     Others  who  had  been 

2  Apol.  §  57. 

3  Orat.  xxi.  on  Athanasius,  §§  27,  29,  31. 

<  The  first  outpost  of  Alexandria.     Athan.  Vit.  Ant.  §  86. 


Effects  of  his  return.     Three  yea?'s' peace.  109 

cruelly  persecuted  would  have  chosen  the  day  ot 
triumph  for  a  season  of  revenge.  But  he  was  most 
glorious  in  his  mildness  to  those  who  had  injured  him. 
He  did  indeed  purge  the  temple  by  driving  the 
buyers  and  sellers  from  it.  But  he  lovingly  reconciled 
those  who  had  striven  with  him.  He  liberated  those 
who  had  been  enslaved  by  the  tyranny  of  heresy. 
He  made  no  distinction  between  foes  and  friends. 
He  raised  up  the  prostrate  Faith.  The  doctrine  ot 
the  Trinity,  placed  like  a  bright  light  on  a  candlestick, 
was  now  again  freely  preached,  and  illuminated  the 
minds  of  all  with  the  radiant  glory  of  the  Godhead. 
He  gave  laws  to  the  world,  and  attracted  the  minds 
of  all  to  himself  by  writing  to  some,  and  by  inviting 
others,  and  teaching  others  who  spontaneously  re- 
sorted to  him,  and  promoting  universal  free-will.  In 
a  word,  he  joined  in  himself  the  virtues  of  two  jewels  : 
he  was  an  adamant  to  those  who  struck  him,  and  a 
magnet  to  those  who  strove  with  him.-" 

In  the  spring  of  A.D.  347,  Athanasius  opened  his 
Festal  Letter,  or  ante-Paschal  Pastoral,  with  words 
of  thanksgiving  for  the  blessings  he  had  received  in 
being  brought  back  to  his  own  city  from  far-off  lands  ; 
and  he  appears  to  have  been  then  engaged  in  hold- 
ing a  Synod  in  Alexandria,  in  which  the  decrees  of 
Sardica  were  confirmed;  and  in  making  Episcopal 
Visitations  in  his  province  for  a  considerable  time.^ 

Three  years  passed  away  quietly ;  the  Church 
appeared  at  length  to  be  at  peace.  But  it  was  in 
appearance  alone.  She  was  soon  to  learn  another 
lesson  of  patience  and  courage  in  adversity  and  per- 
secution, from  the  example  of  Athanasius  and  his 
friends.      And  she  was  to  be  taught  that  her  true 

5  Socr.  ii.  26.    Sozom.  iv.  i. 


1 1 0  Death  of  Constans. 

strength  lies,  not  in  the  support  of  Princes,  but  in  the 
protection  of  the  King  of  Kings. 

Athanasius  had  been  deprived  of  the  aid  of  the 
eldest  Emperor,  Constantine  the  younger,  after  a  short 
reign  of  three  years  ;  and  now  in  the  twenty-fourth 
year  of  his  Episcopate  he  lost  his  faithful  defender 
and  friend,  the  Emperor  of  the  West,  Constans, 
treacherously  slain  by  rebels  and  conspirators  under 
Magnentius,  who  usurped  the  title  of  Emperor  in  the 
early  spring  of  the  year  350  ;  and  the  whole  Roman 
Empire  now  passed  under  the  sway  of  Constantius. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

From  the  death  of  Constans,  A.D.  350  {when  Con- 
stantius  became  sole  Emperor)^  to  the  death  of 
Constantitis,  A.D.  361. 

By  the  death  of  Constans,  Constantius  became  the 
Master  of  the  Roman  World.  He  was  not  without 
good  qualities.  He  was  sober,  temperate,  and  chaste  ; 
sparing  in  food,  drink,  and  sleep  ;  vigorous  in  body, 
a  go6d  rider,  skilful  in  martial  exercises,  and  in  the 
use  of  the  spear  and  the  bow,  and  in  the  science  of 
arms  and  armoury,  especially  for  infantry.^  But  he 
was  easily  swayed  by  courtly  flatterers,  and  yet 
tenacious  of  his  own  dignity,  and  a  scrupulous  observer 
of  pettinesses  in  etiquette,  so  that  it  is  said  ^  he  was 
never  seen  to  blow  his  nose  in  public,  or  to  turn  his 
head  from  one  side  to  the  other,  or  to  taste  any  fruit. 
He  affected  to  be  thought  learned  and  eloquent,  and 
was  a  dilettante  in  versifying.  In  some  respects  he 
was  an  Ecclesiastical  Claudius.  He  was  fond  of 
dogmatizing  on  theological  matters,  of  which  he  knew 
little ;  having  never  been  trained  in  catechetical 
discipline,  as  the  Arians  themselves  confessed.^  He 
was  fanatical  rather  than  religious  ;  for  instance,  in 
the  Council  at  Milan,  he  said  that  he  had  received 

'  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxi.  i6,  *  Ibid. 

3  Sulpic.  Sever,  lib.  ii.  39 


112  Letter  of  Constantius  to  Athanasius. 

from  God  a  Creed  in  a  dream,  which  he  desired  the 
Bishops  to  receive.  When  under  good  influence,  he 
was  amiable  and  compassionate  ;  but  when  subject 
to  the  sway  of  evil  advisers — which  was  often  the 
case — his  moral  and  intellectual  weaknesses  made 
him  one  of  the  worst  of  tyrants,*  especially  when  he 
became  sole  Sovereign  of  the  Roman  World. 

Constantius  appears  to  have  sympathized  with 
Athanasius  on  the  loss  he  had  suffered  by  the  death 
of  Constans.  He  wrote  to  him  a  considerate  letter  of 
condolence  ^  in  cociliatory  terms  : — 

''  Thy  prudence  cannot  but  be  aware  of  my  anxiety 
for  the  prosperity  of  my  brother  Constans,  and  can 
appreciate  my  grief  on  hearing  of  his  death  by  the 
hands  of  wicked  men.  Since  that  time,  inasmuch  as 
some  persons  are  attempting  to  terrify  thee  in  this 
mournful  season,  I  therefore  have  deemed  it  right  to 
send  this  letter  to  thy  constancy,  and  to  exhort  thee 
to  teach  thy  people,  as  a  Bishop  ought  to  do,  those 
things  which  appertain  to  divine  religion  ;  and  to 
devote  thyself  habitually  to  prayer,  and  to  give  no 
credit  to  idle  tales,  whatever  they  may  be  ;  for  it  is  a 
resolve  steadfastly  fixed  in  my  mind  that  thou,  in 
accordance  with  my  will  and  pleasure,  shouldst 
remain  undisturbed  in  thy  see."  In  another  hand 
were  added  the  words,  "  May  the  providence  of 
God  preserve  thee  for  many  years,  most  beloved 
father." 

This  letter  was  occasioned  by  the  charges  brought 
against  Athanasius  by  his  adversaries,  availing  them- 
selves of  the  opportunity  afforded  by  the  death  of 

*  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxi.  1 6. 

^  It  is  inserted  by  Athanasius  in  his  Apology  to  Constantius,  §  23  ; 
also  in  his  History  ad  Monachos,  §  24. 


Constantliis— victor  at  Nisibis  :  exhorts  to  baptism;  makes  113 

Gailus,  Ccesar — Constantius  at  Sirmium. 
Constans.^     Among  them   Ursacius   and  Valens  re- 
pented of  their  recantation/ 

Constantius,  however,  was  then  otherwise  engaged, 
being  occupied  with  an  expedition  against  Sapor, 
King  of  Persia.  His  troops  were  successful  in  this 
campaign  ; — the  historians  say,^  by  the  help  of  the 
prayers  of  James,  the  saintly  Bishop  of  Nisibis,  which 
city  was  besieged  by  the  Persians,  who  were  routed 
before  it.  Constantius  next  marched,  in  the  month 
of  June,  350,  from  Antioch  into  Dacia,  against  the 
usurper  Magnentius.  In  reviewing  his  troops,  he 
exhorted  all  his  soldiers,  who  had  not  been  baptized, 
to  receive  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism,^  representing  to 
them  the  uncertainty  of  life,  and  the  dangers  of  the 
battle-field.  He  himself  was  not  baptized  till  about 
eleven  years  afterwards  ;  but  perhaps  he  did  not  ex- 
pose his  life  to  the  same  dangers.^  He  succeeded  in 
bringing  Vetranion,  an  accomplice  of  Magnentius,  to 
terms  ^  in  December,  A.D.  350,  and  having  raised  his 
Cousin  Gallus  (the  elder  brother  of  Julian)  to  the 
dignity  of  Caesar  in  March,  351,  and  given  him  charge 
of  the  Eastern  frontier  bordering  on  Persia,  Constan- 
tius marched  from  Pannonia  to  Sirmium,  on  the  south- 
east of  Pannonia. 

While  Constantius  was  at  Sirmium,  a  Council  was 
held,  especially  of  Eastern  Bishops,  principally  Arians, 
against  Photinus,  Bishop  of  that  see.^     He  was  de- 

^  Apol.  ad  Arian.  ad  init.     Socr,  ii.  26. 

7  Athan.  ad  Mon.  §  29. 

8  Theodoret,  ii.  26.    Philos.  iii.  22,  23. 
^  Theodoret,  iii.  i. 

1  At  the  great  engagement  of  Mursa,  as  we  shall  see,  Constantius 
remained  at  some  distance  from  the  field  of  battle,  see  p.  144,  note  6. 

2  Zosim.  p.  694.     Socr.  ii.  28.     Sozom.  iv.  4. 
*  Socr.  ii.  29.     Sozom.  iv.  6. 

VOL.    II.  I 


114  Photlnus  deposed — Symod  of  Sirmium — Battle  of  Mursa. 

posed  by  them  for  heresy,  in  asserting  that  Christ  was 
mere  man  ;  for  which  he  had  been  condemned  already 
by  the  Westerns  at  Milan,  and  on  several  other 
occasions.  Germanicus  of  Cyzicum  was  placed  as 
Bishop  in  his  see. 

They  also  framed  another  formula  of  faith/  which 
might  have  been  regarded  as  Catholic,  if  the  opinions 
of  its  framers,  some  of  whom  had  been  deposed  at 
Sardica,  had  not  been  well  known  ;  and  if  they  had 
not  intended  thereby  to  supersede  the  Nicene  Creed  ; 
as  was  more  clearly  shown  by  their  act  some  years 
afterwards,  in  the  same  place,  Sirmium,  A.D.  357, 
when  they  propounded  another  Creed,  which  was 
directly  opposed  to  the  Nicene.^ 

They  added  to  their  Creed  in  A.D.  351  twenty- 
eight  anathemas  against  pure  Arianism,  Sabellianism, 
and  Photinianism.  They  intended  to  display  thereby 
to  Constantius  their  zeal  for  orthodoxy.  And  they  did 
not,  as  yet,  bring  any  charge  against  Athanasius,  or 
make  any  reference  to  the  Council  of  Sardica ;  but 
their  proceedings  were  characterized  by  caution  and 
reserve. 

Not  long  after  this  Council,  the  battle  of  Mursa, 
not  far  to  the  north-west  of  Sirmium,  was  fought 
(Sept.  28,  351)  by  the  troops  of  Constantius  against 
the  usurper  Magnentius,  who  was  totally  routed  in  the 
engagement,  and  who,  about  two  years  afterwards, 
fell  by  his  own  hand  at  Lyons. 

Constantius  was  not  present  at  the  battle/  but  re- 
mained at  a  little  distance  from  it  in  the  church  of 


4  Athan.  de  Synod.  §  27.     Hilar,  de  Synod.  §  38.     Socr.  ii.  30. 

5  See  Athan.  de  Synod.  §  28. 

^  "Constantius  descendere  in  aspectum  pugnse  non  ausus,  in  basilica 
Martyrum  extra  oppidum  deversatus  est."  Sulpic.  Sever.  Hist.  Eccl.ii. 38. 


Va/enSj  Bishop  of  Mursa—'-'-  Linniiious  Cross ^       115 

the  Martyrs.  The  Bishop  of  Mursa,  Valens,  the  in- 
veterate enemy  of  Athanasius,  was  with  him.  He 
had  contrived  that  he  himself  should  be  the  first  to 
receive  the  news  of  the  issue  of  the  contest.  He  im- 
mediately communicated  the  tidings  to  Constantius. 
**  Who  brought  them  to  you  .'' "  asked  the  Emperor. 
"  An  angel  "  was  the  reply.  *'  Not  by  the  valour  of 
my  troops,"  said  Constantius,  "  but  by  thy  prayers 
has  the  victory  been  won."  ^ 

The  impressible  and  superstitious  mind  of  Constan- 
tius was  influenced  by  this  event.  It  gave  an  impulse 
to  the  sway  of  Valens  and  his  coadjutors  over  him, 
and  helped  to  prejudice  him  against  Athanasius.  In 
the  words  of  the  historian,^  "  the  leading  Arians  had 
so  beset  the  court,  that  the  Emperor  did  nothing 
without  their  assent,  being  dependent  on  them  all, 
and  specially  devoted  to  Valens." 

Another  circumstance  occurred  which  he  interpreted 
as  a  sign  of  the  divine  favour  and  approval.  In  this 
year  he  received  a  letter  from  Cyril,  Bishop  of  Jeru- 
salem, describing  the  appearance  in  that  city  on  the 
7th  of  May,  being  Whitsuntide,  of  a  luminous  Cross, 
which  extended  itself  from  Mount  Calvary  to  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  and  was  visible  to  all  the  inhabitants 
in  the  forenoon  of  that  day,  and  continued  to  be  so 
for  some  hours,  and  more  brilliant  than  the  sun. 
"  During  the  time  of  your  father  Constantine  of 
blessed  memory,"  says  S.  Cyril,  "  the  sacred  wood  of 
the  Cross  was  found  at  Jerusalem  ;  but  now,  in  your 
days,  miracles  come  not  from  earth,  but  from  heaven. 

"  Sulpic.  Sever.  Hist.  Eccl.  ii.  38. 

8  Sulpic.  Sever,  ibid.  These  Arian  leaders  were  Ursacius,  Valens, 
Theodorus  Bishop  of  Heraclea,  Stephen  of  Antioch,  Acacius  of 
Caesarea,  Menophantus  of  Ephesus,  George  of  Laodicea,  Narcissus  of 
Neronopolis. 

I    2 


ii6  Flattery  of  Constantius  -Acts  of  Athanasiiis — Death  of 

Julius^  Bishop  of  Rome. 
All  the  people^  of  all  ranks  and  of  all  ages,  flocked  to 
the  Church  to  glorify  God  for  this  apparition,  and  all 
praised  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  the  Worker 
of  miracles,  when  they  beheld  the  truth  of  His 
religion  attested  by  heaven. '^  And  Cyril  desired  the 
Emperor  to  give  glory  for  ever  to  the  holy  consub- 
stantial  Trinity.^ 

Constantius  was  greatly  elated  by  his  victories  over 
Persia  and  Magnentius,and  bysuch  communications  as 
these  from  S.  Cyril,  and  was  puffed  up  by  the  adulation 
of  his  Arianizing  courtiers,  who  ventured  to  style 
him  "  Eternal."  As  Athanasius  and  Hilary^  observe, 
"Those  persons  who  denied  the  Eternity  of  Christ, 
ascribed  Eternity  to  the  Emperor." 

During  the  respite  of  peace  which  Athanasius 
enjoyed  after  his  return  in  the  autumn  of  A.D.  346,  he 
employed  himself  in  the  active  discharge  of  his 
Episcopal  functions,  and  in  some  literary  works.  He 
wrote  at  this  time,  it  is  supposed,^  his  Apology  against 
the  Arians,  and  his  work  on  the  decrees  of  Nicaea, 
and  on  the  opinion  of  his  great  predecessor  Dionysius 
on  the  word  homoousios. 

The  enemies  of  the  Faith,  who  had  been  condemned 
at  Sardica,  and  who  were  exasperated  against 
Athanasius  as  the  cause  of  their  degradation,  looked 
with  a  jealous  eye  on  his  prosperity.  More  than  four 
hundred  Bishops  were  now  in  communion  with  him, 
and  he  appeared  to  exercise  the  principal  spiritual 
sway  in  Christendom.  Julius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  his 
powerful  ally,  was  removed  by  death   on  April   12, 

^  On  this  letter,  see  Valesius  and  others  in  Sozomen,  iv.  5 ;  Socr. 
ii.  28  ;  S.  Cyril  Hieros.  p.  305,  ed.  Oxon.  1703. 

1  See  Montfaucon,  Vit.  Ath.  liv. 

2  Montfaucon,  ibid.  pp.  lii — liii  ;  and  see  above,  vol.  i.  304,  397, 
399,  452- 


Constantius  changes  his  conduct  to  At  ha  nasi  us.        117 

A.D.  352,  and  was  succeeded  by  Liberlus.  The  foes 
of  Athanasius^  had  prevailed  upon  Ursacius  and 
Valens  to  retract  their  recantation  ;  and  Valens,  who 
had  great  influence  with  the  Emperor,  was  induced 
by  them  to  represent  to  Constantius,  that  if  Atha- 
nasius  were  left  in  peace,  he  would  tyrannize  over 
them  all,  and  would  anathematize  his  opponents, 
including  the  Emperor  himself,  as  no  better  than 
Manichaeans  ;  and  that  it  was  the  Emperor's  duty 
and  interest  to  protect  and  favour  that  religious  party 
which  was  most  loyal  to  him.*  Being  moved  by 
these  suggestions,  Constantius  changed  his  mind,  and 
forgot  all  his  promises  to  Athanasius,  and  his  reverence 
for  the  memory  of  his  deceased  brother,  Constans. 

An  event  had  happened  at  Alexandria  which 
offered  a  convenient  plea  for  accusations  against 
Athanasius.  He  had  officiated  at  Easter  in  the 
magnificent  building  which  had  been  originally  a 
temple,  erected  by  the  Emperor  Hadrian,  and  thence 
called  Hadrianeum,  and  which  was  enlarged  and 
beautified  by  Constantius,  and  was  named  Caesarea 
from  him,  but  which  had  not  yet  been  completed  ; 
consequently  the  Emperor  had  not  as  yet  given  any 
instructions  for  its  Consecration.  Athanasius  was 
prevailed  upon  by  the  importunate  solicitations  of  the 
people,  for  whom  there  was  not  sufficient  room  in  the 
other  churches  of  the  city,  to  open  it  for  Divine  worship 
at  that  great  festal  season,^  when  they  flocked  to  it  in 
great  multitudes  for  prayer  and  Holy  Communion. 

This  act  of  presumption,  as  they  called  it,  was  one 
ground   of  accusation  against   him.     Other   charges 

3  Athan.  ad  Mon.  §  28— §  30. 

-*  Ibid.  §  30. 

»  Athan.  Apol.  ad  Const.  §  14. 


1 1 8   Constantius  at  Aries — Fall  of  Vincent —  Grief  ofLiherius. 

were  that  he  had  prejudiced  Constans  against  his 
brother  Constantius,  and  that  he  had  corresponded 
with  the  rebel  Magnentius.^ 

An  opportunity  was  presented  for  bringing  for- 
ward these  charges  in  the  month  of  October,  A.D.  354. 
After  the  death  of  Magnentius,  Constantius  came  to 
Aries,  and  a  Synod  was  then  held  there  in  his  presence. 
Athanasius,  while  absent,  was  arraigned  by  his  enemies. 
Liberius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  sent  Vincent  of  Capua 
to  defend  him,  who  had  been  at  the  Roman  Synod 
in  A.D.  342,  and  at  Sardica  in  344,  and  had  been 
much  esteemed  and  trusted  by  Julius,  Bishop  of 
Rome.  He  was  probably  the  same  Vincentius  who 
had  been  a  legate  from  Sylvester,  Bishop  of  Rome,  at 
Nicaea.  He  brought  with  him  letters  from  many 
Eastern  Bishops,  especially  from  eighty  Bishops  of 
Egypt,  in  defence  of  Athanasius.  Constantius  received 
Vincent  with  anger,  and  threatened  him  and  other 
Bishops  with  banishment  unless  they  condemned 
Athanasius.  Vincent  was  panic-struck,  and  subscribed 
the  act  of  condemnation."^  Liberius  mourned  over 
his  fall,  and  wrote  to  Caecilian,  Bishop  of  Spoleto, 
'*  I  pray  that  this  defection  may  not  shake  your  firm- 
ness ;"  and  in  a  letter  to  Hosius,  Bishop  of  Corduba, 
he  said,  "  I  have  resolved  rather  to  die  for  God  than 
abandon  the  truth."  ^  Liberius  little  knew  what  he 
himself  would  do.  The  Bishop  of  Treves  stood  firm, 
and  was  banished  to  Phrygia,  where  he  died.^ 

Liberius  sent  letters  of  remonstrance  to  Constantius 

«  Athan.   Apol.  ad  Const.  §  6.     All  these  charges  are  answered  by 
Athanasius  in  that  Apology  to  Constantius. 

7  Hilar.  Frag.  p.  676.     Athan.  Apol.  ad  Const.  §  27. 

8  Ibid. 

9  Hilar,  ad  Const,  pp.  540,  562,  570  ;  Frag.  p.  621.    Athan.de  Fuga, 
§  4;  ad  Mon.  §  76. 


Liberiiis — Constaiitius  at  Milan — Council — aiid  Creed.    119 

by  the  hands  of  envoys,  men  of  courage  and  of  ability, 
such  as  Lucifer  of  Cagliari,  in  Sardinia,  and  expressed 
his  astonishment  at  what  had  been  done  under  the 
Emperor's  auspices  at  Aries  ;  and  entreated  him  to 
give  permission  for  the  holding  of  a  Synod  to 
deliberate  on  the  matter. 

The  Emperor  complied  with  his  request,  and  sum- 
moned a  Council,  to  be  held  at  Milan,  where  it  met 
in  A.D.  355.  That  Council  was  disastrous  to  the 
Church.^  More  than  300  Bishops  were  present,  few 
of  them  friends  of  Athanasius.  The  Council  of  Aries 
had  alarmed  his  allies.  Constantius  himself  was  at 
Milan.  Eusebius,  Bishop  of  Vercellae,  a  noble  con- 
fessor of  the  faith,  proposed  that  they  should  prove 
their  orthodoxy  by  subscribing  the  Creed  of  Nicaea. 
Dionysius,  Bishop  of  Milan,  another  confessor,  put 
his  name  to  it.  Valens  seized  the  pen  and  paper. 
A  tumult  arose.  The  Arians — Valens  and  Ursacius 
at  their  head — quitted  the  Church,  and  being  "  afraid 
of  the  people  of  Milan,  who  adhered  with  noble  zeal 
to  the  Catholic^  faith,"  hastened  to  the  palace,  where 
the  Emperor  was.  "  Thence  they  put  forth  an  Epistle 
in  the  Emperor's  name,"  says  Sulpicius,^  "tainted  with 
heretical  pravity,  with  the  intent  that  if  the  people 
accepted  it,  it  might  be  promulged  on  public  authority  ; 
but  if  not,  the  Emperor  would  be  held  responsible  for 
it ;  and  its  errors  would  be  venial,  since  he,  being 
only  a  catechumen,  could  not  be  supposed  to  be  well 
versed  in  the  mysteries  of  the  faith.'-*  Constantius 
adopted  it,  and  professed  that  he  had  received  it  from 
heaven  in  a  dream.  The  Bishops  of  the  Court  were 
complacent,  and  said  that  the  Emperor  desired  the 

^  Socr.  ii.  36.     Sozom.  iv.  9.  ^  Sulpic.  Sever,  ii.  39. 

3  Ibid. 


I20  Lucifer  of  Cagliari  against  Cojistantius — banishments. 

peace  of  the  Church,  and  that  his  recent  victories  in  war 
proved  that  he  was  favoured  by  heaven.  But  the  bold 
Bishop  of  CagHari  protested  against  it,  and  affirmed  that 
the  Nicene  Creed — and  that  alone — was  to  be  main- 
tained; and  that  not  even  if  all  the  Emperor's  troops 
were  present,  would  heeverassent  to  a  sacrilegious  edict, 
or  cease  to  execrate  what  was  a  blasphemy  against 
God.  Happily  he  had  the  people  of  Milan  on  his  side. 
When  the  Emperor's  letter  was  read  in  their  presence 
in  the  Church,  they  rejected  it  with  abhorrence.'' 
Constantius  sent  for  the  recusant  Bishops,  Lucifer, 
Eusebius,  and  Dionysius,  and  commanded  them  to 
condemn  Athanasius.  They  declined  to  do  so.^  His 
accusers,  they  said,  Ursacius  and  Valens,  had  formerly 
recanted  their  accusation,  and  were  not  entitled  to 
credit.  "  But  I  am  his  accuser,"  replied  the  Emperor. 
"  How  canst  thou  accuse  a  man  who  is  absent .''"  was 
the  reply.  "This  is  not  Roman  law.  It  is  not  the  law 
of  the  Church."  "But  my  will  is  law."  The  Bishops 
lifted  up  their  hands  in  prayer  to  God,  and  besought 
Him  to  teach  the  Emperor  that  the  Empire  itself  was 
God's,  Who  had  entrusted  him  with  it.  Constantius 
drew  his  sword,  and  threatened  them  with  death,  but 
exchanged  that  sentence  for  exile.  Lucifer  was 
banished  to  Germanicia,  Eusebius  to  Scythopolis,  and 
Dionysius  to  Cappadocia.  The  priest  Eutropius,  and 
the  deacon  Hilarius,  sent  by  Liberius,  were  not 
allowed  to  return  to  Rome  ;  the  latter  was  scourged, 
among  the  insults  of  the  courtiers,  and  gave  thanks 
to  God.6 

**  Sulpic.  Sever,  ibid.   Hilar.  Apol.  ad  Const,  p.  571.  Lucifer  Calarit. 
pp.  780,  787,  and  notes  in  ed.  Migne,  Patrol,  torn.  xiii. 
5  Athan.  ad  Mon.  §§  33,  34,  76. 
•*  Ibid.  §  41. 


S.  Hilary  :  his  exile :  and  writings — Constaniiiis  assails    1 2 1 
Liberius,  Bishop  of  Rome. 

The  banishment  of  these  and  other  Confessors,  to 
different  and  distant  regions,  in  order  that  they  might 
not  hold  counsel  with  one  another,  was  overruled  by 
God's  providence  for  good.  Their  teaching  and  their 
sufferings  had  a  missionary  character,  and  diffused  the 
true  faith  wherever  they  wentJ 

Among  the  Western  Bishops  who  suffered  for  the 
faith  was  S.  Hilary,  the  Bishop  of  Poictiers,  who  was 
banished  to  Phrygia,^  and  rendered  great  service  to  the 
East  and  West  by  his  writings  on  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity,  and  on  Synods  ;  and  who  addressed  a  letter 
to  Constantius  on  the  wrongs  inflicted  by  him  on  the 
Church. 

A  general  persecution  now  raged  in  almost  all 
parts  of  the  Empire.  Some  Bishops  remained  firm, 
such  as  Maximus  of  Naples,  and  Rufinianus  of  Civita 
Vecchia;  some  were  deposed  from  their  sees,  or 
martyred  ;  others  lapsed  from  the  faith. 

Constantius  next  proceeded  to  assail  the  chief 
Bishop  of  the  West,  Liberius  of  Rome.^  He  sent  to 
him  his  high  chamberlain,  Eusebius  the  Eunuch,  with 
gifts  and  promises  of  favour,  and  desired  him  to  con- 
demn Athanasius.  Liberius  declined  the  gifts,  and 
refused  to  comply.  Intelligence  of  this  was  sent  to 
the  Emperor,  and  Liberius  was  conveyed  away  from 
Rome  by  night.^  The  heathen  historian  Ammianus 
relates  that  when  Liberius  was  admonished  to  sub- 
scribe to  the  deposition  of  Athanasius,  in  accordance 
with  the  sentence  of  others,  and  at  the  command  of 
the  Emperor,  he  persevered  in  refusing  to  do  so,  ex- 
claiming that  it  would  be  the  extremity  of  injustice 
to  condemn  a  man  unseen  and  unheard.     "  Constan- 

7  Athan.  ad  Mon.  §  31— §  34.  ^  Sulpic.  Sever,  ii.  39. 

»  Athan.  ad  Mon.  §  39.  2  ibid.     Ammian.  Marcellin.  xv.7. 


122  Libcrius  before  Consta?itiiis. 

tius  (adds  Ammianus)  being  always  hostile  to 
Athanasius,  although  he  knew  that  the  sentence  was 
already  pronounced,  yet  earnestly  desired  that  it 
should  be  ratified  by  the  authority,  as  being  pre- 
eminent,^ of  the  Bishop  of  the  Eternal  City.  And 
when  he  did  not  obtain  his  wish,  Liberius  was  with 
difficulty  carried  away  from  Rome  at  midnight, 
through  fear  of  the  Roman  people,  by  whom  he  was 
much  beloved." 

The  dialogue  of  Liberius  with  Constantius  has  been 
preserved  by  the  Church-historian  Theodoret.'^  The 
substance  of  his  narrative  is  as  follows.  Eusebius 
the  Chamberlain,  and  Epictetus,  an  Arian  Bishop, 
were  present.  The  Emperor  required  Liberius  to 
condemn  Athanasius.  "  I  cannot  condemn  him  un- 
heard." *'  He  was  condemned  at  the  Synod  of  Tyre." 
"  Yes,  in  his  absence,  without  proof"  ""  Why  do  you 
alone  defend  a  miscreant,  and  disturb  the  peace  of  the 
Empire  ?  ^^  "  Once  on  a  time  only  three  persons  were 
found  to  disobey  a  king.^' 

Here  the  Chamberlain  interposed, "  Sire,  Liberius  is 
comparing  your  Majesty  to  Nebuchadnezzar."  "  No. 
All  that  I  ask  is,  that  Athanasius  may  not  be  con- 
demned ^vithout  a  trial,  and  that  the  Nicene  Faith 
may  first  be  subscribed  by  all  his  judges,  and  that 
then  we  may  proceed  to  try  him."  "  He  has  injured 
all  men,  and  no  man  more  than  myself  He  stirred 
up  my  brother  Constans  against  me.  I  have  long 
borne  him  with  patience,  but  now  I  can  bear  him  no 


3  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xv.,  **  Auctoritate  quoque  qua  potioris  ?etevnn£ 
urbis  Episcopi  firmari."  For  "potiorzV"  I  venture  to  read  "potio;Y" 
(qua  potiore,  i.  e.  as  being  pre-eminent),  and  to  translate  it  so.  It  might, 
indeed,  agree  with  "urbis." 

•*  Theodoret,  ii.  13.     Concil.  General,  ii.  775. 


Liber  ills  banished  to  Thrace—  Constantius  assails  Hosiiis.    123 

longer ;  and  I  deem  no  victory  so  great — no,  not  the 
overthrow  of  the  rebels  Magnentius  and  Silvanus — 
as  that  of  conquering  Athanasius,  and  ejecting  him 
from  his  see.  Therefore  yield,  subscribe,  and  then 
return  in  peace  to  Rome."  "  The  laws  of  the  Church 
are  dearer  to  me  than  Rome."  "  If  you  do  not  assent 
to  his  condemnation  in  three  days,  consider  what 
other  place  you  desire  to  be  sent  to."  "  Not  three 
days,  nor  three  months  will  change  my  mind.  Send 
me  where  you  please."  Two  days  elapsed,  and  the 
Emperor  sent  for  him  again,  but  he  was  inflexible, 
and  he  was  banished  to  Beroea  in  Thrace.  The 
Emperor  and  Empress  offered  him  money  for  his 
journey,  which  he  declined  ;  and  in  three  days  he  was 
taken  to  Beroea,  where  he  remained  an  exile  for  two 
years  ;  and  Felix  was  placed  by  the  Emperor  as 
Bishop  of  Rome  in  his  stead.^ 

Constantius  next  attempted  to  win  over  Hosius, 
Bishop  of  Corduba.^  He  was  the  oldest  Bishop  in 
Christendom,  having  been  a  Bishop  for  sixty  years, 
and  was  now  more  than  a  hundred  years  of  age  ;  he 
had  been  a  confessor  in  heathen  persecution  ;  had 
taken  a  part  in  the  Council  of  Eliberis  in  A.D.  305,  of 
Aries,  A.D.  314 ;  had  presided  at  Nicaea,  A.D.  325,  and 
at  Sardica,  A.D.  344.  Constantius  imagined  that  if  he 
won  over  Hosius  to  his  side,  all  would  be  gained. 
He  sent  for  the  aged  Bishop,  and  spoke  to  him  gently, 
and  asked  him  to  reject  Athanasius,  and  to  commu- 
nicate with  the  Arians.  Hosius  indignantly  declined 
to  do  so,  and  was  dismissed.  After  he  returned  home, 
he  received  a  menacing  letter  from  the  Emperor,  to 
which  he  sent  an  answer  as  follows  :  ^ — "  I  confessed 
the  faith  when  I  was  persecuted  for  it  under  your  grand- 

*  Athan.  ad  Mon.  §  75.  «  Ibid.  §  42.  '  Ibid.  §  44. 


124  Reply  of  Ho  sins  to  Constant'ms. 

father  Maximian  ;  and  if  I  am  persecuted  again,  I  am 
content  to  bear  it,  rather  than  shed  innocent  blood, 
and  betray  the  truth.  Listen  not  to  Ursacius  and 
Valens  ;  what  they  desire  is  not  to  try  Athanasius, 
but  to  propagate  their  own  heresy.  When  I  was 
at  the  Council  of  Sardica,  to  which  you  and  your 
brother  Constans  convened  us,  I  challenged  Ursacius 
and  Valens  to  bring  proofs  against  Athanasius.  They 
could  not  do  it.  Cease,  I  pray  you,  from  persecution. 
Remember  that  you  are  a  mortal  man  ;  fear  the  day 
of  doom,  and  keep  yourself  harmless  for  that  day. 
Meddle  not  with  Church  matters.  Send  not  missives 
concerning  them  to  us.  Rather  learn  them  from  us. 
God  has  given  you  the  Empire  ;  Church  matters  are 
committed  to  us.  As  to  the  subject  of  your  letter,  hear 
my  answer.  I  do  not  communicate  with  the  Arians. 
I  anathematize  their  heresy.  I  will  not  write  against 
Athanasius,  whom  we  and  the  Church  of  Rome,  and 
the  whole  Synod,  have  pronounced  innocent.  Nay, 
you  yourself  have  acquitted  him,  and  have  desired  him 
to  return  with  honour  to  his  country  and  to  his  see. 
What  is  the  cause  of  this  change  }  Why,  have  you 
forgotten  your  own  letters  to  him  1  He  has  the  same 
enemies  now  as  he  had  then  ;  and  if  there  had  been 
any  truth  in  their  charges  against  him,  those  enemies 
would  not  have  fled,  when  they  were  called  upon  by 
the  Synod  to  prove  them.  Listen  not  to  such  men. 
Make  not  yourself  an  accomplice  in  their  guilt.  They 
wish  you  to  be  their  servant,  that  by  your  means  they 
may  propagate  their  heresy  in  the  Church.  It  is  not 
the  part  of  a  wise  man  to  incur  manifest  danger,  in 
order  to  gratify  the  evil  wishes  of  others.  Cease,  O 
Constantius,  from  doing  so,  and  hearken  to  me,  who 


H OS  ills  is  banished  to  Sir  mi  inn — Attack  on  Athanasius,    125 

am  saying  what  it  is  my  duty  to  write,  and  what  it 
is  your  duty  not  to  despise." 

Hosius  received  another  summons  from  Constan- 
tius.  He  refused  to  comply  with  the  Emperor's  com- 
mand to  condemn  Athanasius,  and  to  communicate 
with  his  enemies  ;  he  was  therefore  sent  into  banish- 
ment to  Sirmium,  where  he  remained  in  exile  a  year. 

Athanasius  himself  was  next  the  object  of  attack, 
in  the  following  year,  A.D.  356.'' 

On  the  eve  of  Friday,  the  9th  of  February,  he  was 
at  a  nocturnal  vigil  in  the  Church  of  Theonas,  at 
Alexandria.  Syrianus,  duke  of  Egypt,  came  at  night 
with  an  armed  force  of  about  five  thousand  men 
against  the  Church.  Athanasius  was  sitting  on  his 
Episcopal  throne  ;  and  when  he  was  thus  besieged,  he 
gave  orders  to  the  deacon  and  people  to  sing  the  136th 
Psalm,  **  O  give  thanks  to  the  Lord,  for  He  is  gracious, 
and  His  mercy  endureth  for  ever."  The  doors  of  the 
Church  were  burst  open,  swords  flashed,  arrows  flew ; 
many  persons  were  wounded  and  slain  ;  the  virgins 
of  the  Church  were  seized  and  shamefully  treated. 
The  Bishop  remained  sitting  in  his  throne,  and  ex- 
horted the  people  to  pray.  They  implored  him  to 
retire.  He  declined  to  do  so  till  all  who  were  able 
had  left  the  Church.  At  length  some  of  the  Clergy 
and  Monks  drew  him  from  his  seat ;  and  although  the 
Church  was  guarded  by  the  soldiery,  he  in  a  marvel- 
lous manner  escaped  unhurt  through  the  crowd. 

Other  outrages  were  perpetrated  by  the  troops  of 
Syrianus,  and  sacrilegious  abominations  desecrated  the 
Churches.^     The  Christians  of  Alexandria  addressed 

s  Athan.  Apol.  ad  Const.  §  25  ;  de  Fuga,  §  24;  ad  Mon.  §  81. 
3  Athan.  ad  Mon.  §§  55,  57,  59. 


126  Athanasius  retires  into  the  deseii. 

a  remonstrance  to  Constantius.^  The  Emperor  did 
not  censure  what  was  done,  but  sent  officers  to  the 
city  with  orders  to  pursue  Athanasius,  and  to  bring 
him  to  trial  and  execution. 

He  had  now  withdrawn  into  the  desert,  where  he 
spent  six  years  in  retirement  and  wanderings.  He 
kept  up  a  communication  with  his  people  by  letters 
from  time  to  time.  "  Our  Churches,"  he  wrote,^  "  have 
been  taken  from  us,  and  given  to  the  Arians  ;  they  have 
our  places,  and  we  have  been  banished  from  them.  But 
we  have  the  Faith  ;  they  cannot  rob  us  of  that.  Which 
is  the  better  of  the  two,  the  place  or  the  faith  }  Who 
therefore  has  lost  most,  or  gained  most }  he  who  has 
the  place  and  lost  the  faith,  or  he  who  has  lost  the 
place  and  has  the  faith  1  Every  place  is  good  where  the 
faith  is.    Wherever  holy  men  dwell,  the  place  is  holy." 

In  the  mean  time,  George,  a  Cappadocian,  of  low 
birth  and  vicious  life,  was  sent  as  Bishop,  A.D.  356, 
with  a  military  force  to  take  possession  of  the  see  of 
Athanasius.^  The  scenes  of  violence  already  described 
were  renewed.  The  persecution  extended  beyond 
Alexandria.  Ninety  Bishops  of  Egypt  were  in  com- 
munion with  Athanasius  ;  these  were  required  to 
communicate  with  his  enemies,  on  pain  of  being 
ejected  from  their  sees.  More  than  thirty  of  them 
were  expelled ;  illiterate  and  immoral  men  were 
placed  in  their  sees,**  having  received  ordination  from 
the  Meletlan  schismatics. 

At  this  time  Athanasius  addressed  his  Apology  to 
the  Emperor   Constantius,  in    which   he  refutes  the 

1  Athan.  ad  Mon.  §  48,  §  57. 
*^  Frag.  Epist.,  Montfaucon,  p.  Ixv. 

^  Athan.  ad  Episc.  Egypt.  §  7  ;  de  Fuga.  Sozomen,  iv.  10.  Theo- 
doret,  ii.  ii.     Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxii.  11. 

^  Athan.  de  Fuga,  §  7  ;  ad  Mon.  §§  27,  73,  78. 


His  Apology  to  Cofistantius  ;  and  other  writings.     127 

charges  against  himself.  He  had  intended  to  go  in 
person  to  the  Emperor,  and  had  set  out  on  a  journey 
for  the  purpose  ;  but  when  he  heard  that  George  the 
Cappadocian  had  been  placed  in  his  see,  and  that  the 
Emperor  had  set  a  price  on  his  head,^  he  abandoned 
his  intention,  and  retired  into  the  desert. 

It  has  been  said  by  some  that  Athanasius  had 
been  biassed  by  prejudice  against  Constantius, 
under  a  sense  of  personal  wrong  ;  and  that  this  pre- 
judice appears  in  some  of  his  writings.  Let,  how- 
ever, any  one  compare  what  is  said  of  Constantius 
by  some  contemporaries  of  Athanasius — such  as 
Lucifer  of  Cagliari,  and  S.  Hilary— and  he  will  be 
surprised  by  the  mildness  with  which  Athanasius 
speaks  to  the  Emperor  in  this  Apology.  In  a  later 
work  (the ''  History  of  the  Arians,"  which  he  addressed 
to  the  Monks  of  Egypt),  when  gentler  appeals  had 
failed,  his  language  was  more  severe. 

The  enforced  leisure  of  Athanasius  was  profitable 
to  the  Church.  He  wrote  (in  A.D.  358)  his  "  Apology 
for  his  own  Flight;"  and  he  also  composed  his 
Letter  on  the  death  of  Arius  to  Serapion  the  Bishop  ; 
and  his  four  orations  against  the  Arians — a  treasure- 
house  of  theological  argument  on  the  Eternal  Son- 
ship  of  Christ;  and  his  four  Epistles  to  Serapion 
on  the  Divine  Nature  and  Person  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
S.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  in  his  oration  ^  on  S.  Athana- 
sius, says  that  by  this  wise  use  of  retirement  he  set 
to  Bishops  and  Priests  an  example  of  uniting  the 
sacredness  of  the  Priesthood  with  the  science  of  the 
Philosopher,  and  of  combining  active  tranquillity  with 
tranquil  activity— a  lesson  needed  in  a  restless  age. 

In  A.D.  357,  Constantius  visited  Rome  and  Milan, 

5  Theodoret,  ii.  11.  c  Qrat.xxi.  §  19. 


128  Formulas  of  Sirmium — Fall  of  Ho  sins — Fall  of  Liberius. 

whence  he  passed  to  lUyrla,  and  halted  at  Sirmium. 
There  the  Arians  framed  another  formula  of  faith, 
the  second  put  forth  by  them  there.  It  was  drawn 
up  by  Potamius,  Bishop  of  Lisbon,  in  conjunction 
with  Valens,  Ursacius,  and  Germinius.  In  this  for- 
mula they  expressly  rejected  the  word  ousia  (sub- 
stance) and  homooiision  {pi  the  same  substance)  and 
homoiousion  (of  like  substance)  as  applied  to  the 
Son  of  God  in  relation  to  the  Father,  and  they  de- 
clared that  the  Father  only  is  God.'''  This  is  what  is 
called  the  "  Sirmiensis  blasphemia,"  "doctrina  impie- 
tatis,'^  and  "fides  infidelis  "  by  S.  Hilary.^ 

Potamius,  Bishop  of  Lisbon,  the  framer  of  this 
Creed,  had  been  rejected  as  a  heretic  by  Hosius, 
the  aged  Bishop  of  Corduba,  who  was  now  a  prisoner 
at  Sirmium.  The  venerable  Bishop — "centenario 
major" — was  required  by  the  Emperor  to  subscribe 
this  formula ;  he  was  beaten  and  tortured,  and  at 
last  he  yielded  and  subscribed  it.^  But  he  would  not 
condemn  Athanasius.^  He  was  then  allowed  to  re- 
turn to  Corduba,  where  he  died  soon  afterwards,  pro- 
testing his  remorse  for  his  act,  and  warning  all  to 
shun  the  Arian  heresy. 

The  fall  of  Hosius  was  soon  followed  by  another 
defection,  still  more  deplorable,  that  of  Liberius, 
Bishop  of  Rome.  It  is  thus  described  by  a  Roman 
Catholic  writer,  the  learned  Benedictine  Montfaucon.^ 
"  He  had  borne  bravely  his  former  persecution,  but 

7  Socr.  ii.  30.     Athan.  de  Synod.  §  28. 

s  Hilar,  de  Synod,  pp.  464,  476,  498. 

^  Sulpic.  Sever,  ii,  p.  417.  Socr.  ii.  31.  Sozom.  iv.  12.  Athan. 
ad  Mon.  §  45,  §  46.  Hilar,  pp.  461,  464,  513,  580,  where  it  is  called 
"Hosii  deliramentum."     Cp.  Hooker,  V.  xlii.  3. 

1  Athan.  ad  Mon.  §  45  ;  ad  Arian.  §  90. 

'^  Vit.  Athan.  p.  Ixxiii. 


Fall  of  Liber  his —  Tenderness  of  Athanasius.         129 

was  now  broken  by  the  duration  and  weariness  of 
his  banishment  at  Beroea  in  Thrace,  and  by  the 
threats  of  the  Arians,  and  by  his  own  sufferings  and 
those  of  his  friends,  and  was  indignant  at  the  pro- 
sperity of  his  rival  Bishop  at  Rome,  FeHx.  At  this 
time  Fortunatianus,  Bishop  of  Aquileia,  succeeded  in 
swaying  his  mind  toward  communion  with  the 
Arians,  and  condemnation  of  Athanasius.  Demo- 
philus.  Bishop  of  Bercea,  proposed  to  him  ^  the  Sir- 
mian  faith,  or  rather  the  Sirmian  impiety,  to  which  he 
subscribed,  promising  that  he  would  never  more  hold 
communion  with  Athanasius.  He  also  wrote  a  letter 
to  Constantius,  in  which  he  announced  his  readiness 
to  obey  his  behests,  and  to  condemn  Athanasius,  and 
prayed  for  leave  to  return  to  Rome.  Constantius  did 
not  send  an  immediate  reply,  and  Liberius,  impatient 
of  further  delay,  wrote  to  the  Eastern  Bishops,  and  to 
Ursacius,  Valens,  and  Germinius,  the  leaders  of 
Arianism,  and  humbly  prayed  to  be  admitted  to 
communion  with  them  ;  so  much  'more  did  the  love 
of  his  home  and  his  see  prevail  with  him  than  the 
sense  of  duty  and  honour.  At  the  request  of 
Ursacius,  the  Emperor  allowed  Liberius  to  return." 

Athanasius  in  his  retirement  received  the  news  of  the 
fall  of  his  two  friends  and  former  allies.  He  deplored 
the  sufferings  by  which  they  had  been  brought 
so  low,  and  in  a  loving  spirit  of  tender  sympathy 
he  cast  a  veil  over  their  failure  in  the  hour  of  trial."* 

He  had  many  fellow-sufferers  in  that  time  01 
sorrow.     Among  the  most  remarkable  was  S.  Hilary, 

3  What  the  pi'ecise  form  of  words  was  that  Liberius  subscribed  is  not 
certain.  Its  character  is  sufficiently  described  by  Hilary,  and  it  satisfied 
Constantius  and  the  enemies  of  Athanasius,  who  deplores  it. 

4  Ad  Mon.  §  45  ;  de  Fuga,  §  4,  §  5- 

VOL.   IL  K 


130     S.Hilary — Phcebadius — Cyril.    Schismatical  results 

of  Arianism: 
Bishop  of  Poictlers.  He  had  been  banished  Into 
Phrygia  by  Constantius  ;  and  he  there  made  use  of 
his  seclusion  to  write  his  treatise  on  Synods,  addressed 
to  the  Bishops  of  Gaul  and  Britain,  with  special  refer- 
ence to  the  Arian  formularies  of  faith.  He  there 
denounced  the  Sirmian  symbol  of  Potamlus,  and 
guarded  the  Churches  of  Gaul  against  the  heresy  it 
contained.  That  symbol  was  also  refuted  in  a  learned 
treatise,  still  extant,  by  Phoebadius,  Bishop  of  Agen 
in  Aquitania.  Not  long  afterwards,  S.  Cyril,  Bishop 
of  Jerusalem,  author  of  the  catechetical  lectures  stiil 
preserved,  was  deposed  by  Acacius,  Bishop  of  Csesarea, 
and  driven  from  his  see.^ 

One  result,  however,  of  these  conquests  of  heresy, 
was  that  the  victorious  party  now  began  to  be  split 
up  into  opposite  factions.  The  shifting  formulas  of 
Arianism  drifted  downwards  to  lower  and  lower 
depths.  The  Macedonians  were  their  natural  off- 
spring, and  applied  to  the  Holy  Spirit  similar  lan- 
guage to  that  of  the  Arians  with  regard  to  the  Son 
of  God.  They  denied  His  divine  Consubstantiality. 
The  Apollinarians  also  affirmed  that  the  divine  Mind 
was  In  the  place  of  a  reasonable  soul  in  the  Person 
of  Christ.  Aetius  the  Sophist,  ordained  deacon  by 
Leontius  of  Antioch,  and  a  friend  of  George  of 
Alexandria ;  and  a  follower  of  Aetius,  Eudoxius 
Bishop  of  Antioch,  afterwards  of  Constantinople  ;  and 
Eunomius,  his  disciple.  Bishop  of  Cyzicum  (but  after- 
wards disowned  by  him),  represented  the  earher  form 
of  Arianism,  and  condemned  hoXhih^  Jiomooiisian  and 
homoioiisiati  doctrine,  and  were  called  Anomccans  or 
Heterotisians,  as  affirming  that  the  Son  was  unlike  the 
Father,  and  different  from  Him  in  substance.     They 

5  Socr.  ii.  40. 


The  Semi- Avians  in  the  ascendant — Synod  of  Ancyi-a.      131 

held  to  the  second  formula  of  Sirmlum  framed  by 
Potamius.  But  a  large  number  of  persons,  shocked 
by  such  impiety,  attempted  to  find  a  middle  term  be- 
tween them  and  Athanasius.  These  were  the  Semi- 
Arians  ;  their  head  was  Basilius  of  xA.ncyra,  who  had 
been  deposed  at  the  Council  of  Sardica,  and  had 
great  influence  with  Constantius ;  and  they  endea- 
voured to  persuade  him  to  banish  Aetius,  Eudoxius, 
and  their  associates.  On  the  occasion  of  a  dedica- 
tion of  a  Church  at  Ancyra,  they  met  in  Council 
there  in  the  spring  of  A.D.  358,  in  order  to  rescue  the 
Church,  as  they  said,  from  the  shipwreck  to  which  it 
was  being  hurried  by  the  dangerous  pilotage  of 
Aetius.  In  this  Council  they  condemned  the 
Anomceans,  and  published  a  long  exposition  of 
faith,  heretical  only  by  defect.  They  issued  a 
Synodical  letter  in  that  sense  to  the  Bishops  of 
Phoenicia  and  all  others.^ 

Athanasius  looked  on  them  with  a  friendly  eye. 
He  thought  that  they  were  not  far  from  the  truth, 
and  ought  to  be  treated  with  sympathy  ; ''  and  Hilary 
was  of  the  same  mind.^ 

For  a  time  the  Semi-Arians,  with  Basilius  of  An- 
cyra at  their  head,  prevailed.  Aetius  was  banished 
to  Phrygia  ;  Eunomius  (who  had  been  ordained  deacon 
by  Eudoxius)  was  exiled  to  the  same  country  ;  Eu- 
doxius retired  to  Armenia.  About  sixty-six  more  of 
the  Anomcean  party  were  also  banished,  and  Con- 
stantius proceeded  so  far  as  to  entertain  the  design  of 
summoning   a  Council  against  the  Anomceans,  and 

"  Sozom.  iv.  12,  13.     Epiphan.  Haer.  73.     Concil.  General,  ii.  789. 

7  De  Synod.  §  32,  §  41  ;  ad  Afros,  §  9. 

^  S.  Hilar,  de  Synod,  p.  505.  He  says  that  their  formula  is  capable 
of  a  "piaintelligentia,"  but  may  be  misunderstood,  and  become  i)npia. 
Cp.  pp.  515,  521,  522,574. 

K    2 


132      Decline  of  Semi-Arians — "  TJie  dated  Creed'''  of  the 

Avians. 
fixed  on  Nicomedia  for  the  purpose.     The  execution 
of  this  design  was,  however,  interrupted  by  an  earth- 
quake. 

But  the  victory  of  the  Semi-Arians  was  of  short 
duration. 

It  was  soon  proved  that  there  was  no  solid  resting- 
place  between  Athanasius  and  Arius.  Though  the 
Semi-Arians  seemed  to  triumph  for  a  time,  and  had 
Constantius  on  their  side,  yet  they  were  soon  aban- 
doned by  him,  and  Athanasius  found  himself  face  to 
face  with  Arianism. 

In  the  spring  of  A.D.  359,  Constantius  was  at 
Sirmium  in  Eastern  Illyria,  with  his  Court,  in  which 
were  many  Bishops,  attendant  upon  him,  as  usual. 
Both  parties  were  represented,  the  Semi-Arians  by 
Marcellus,  the  Arians  by  Valens,  Ursacius,  Mark  oi 
Arethusa,  and  George,  the  usurping  Bishop  of  Alexan- 
dria. The  latter  party  prevailed,  and  another  Creed 
was  drawn  up,  professedly  by  Mark  of  Arethusa,  in 
which  the  word  substance  (one  substance  with  the 
Father)  was  expressly  rejected,  as  not  found  in  Scrip- 
ture, and  as  a  cause  of  scandal.  It  was  subscribed  by 
the  Arians,  and  even  by  Basil  of  Ancyra,  but  with  a 
qualifying  reserve,  ''  that  the  Son  was  like  the  Father 
in  all  tJiingsT  But  the  Arians  added  the  clause,  "  as 
the  Holy  Scriptures  affirm  and  teach ;"  in  which 
general  terms  they  took  refuge,  and  wrapped  up  their 
heresy.^  Prefixed  to  this  formula  was  this  preamble  : 
"  This  Catholic  Faith  was  put  forth  in  the  presence  of 
our  Lord  the  most  religious  Constantius  Augustus, 
glorious  for  his  victories,  eternal,  in  the  Consul- 
ship of  the  illustrious  Flavius  Eusebius  and  Flavius 
Hypatius,  on  the  eleventh  day  before  the  calends  of 

•  Athan.  de  Synod.  §  3— §  8.    Sozom.  iv.  17.     Socr.  ii.  37. 


Council  of  Ariminum — at  first  ^  orthodox.  133 

June  "  (i.  e.  May  22).  It  was  thence  called  "  the  dated. 
Creed ;"  and  it  was  remarked  that  the  Arians  thus 
proclaimed  the  novelty  of  their  faith,  and  gave  to  a 
human  master,  Constantius,  the  title  which  they 
denied  to  Christ,  that  of  Eternal} 

Having  succeeded  in  putting  forth  this  Creed,  the 
Arians  next  endeavoured  to  obtain  its  general  recep- 
tion. Being  favoured  by  the  imperial  Chamberlain 
Eusebius,  and  being  apprehensive  that  if  all  the 
Bishops  met  in  one  Council  they  would  be  overpowered 
by  the  union  of  Semi-Arians  with  Athanasius,  they 
persuaded  the  Emperor  to  summon  a  Council  to  two 
different  places,  one  in  the  East  at  Seleucia  in 
Isauria,^  the  other  in  the  West  at  Ariminum,  or 
Rimini,  on  the  Adriatic,  a  little  to  the  south  of 
Ravenna. 

About  400  Bishops  met  at  Ariminum,  and  at  first 
everything  seemed  hopeful.  The  formula  of  Sirmium 
was  rejected  ;  the  Creed  of  Nicaea,  and  that  alone, 
was  accepted.  Ursacius,  Valens,  Germinius,  Auxen- 
tius,  and  Demophilus  were  condemned  as  heretics. 
Twenty  Episcopal  envoys^  were  sent  from  the 
Council — not,  however,  men  of  mature  age  and 
experience — to  Constantius,  to  inform  him  of  what 
had  been  done  by  the  Council,  and  to  entreat  his 
permission  that  the  Bishops  of  the  Council  might 
return  at  once  to  their  Dioceses. 

The  Emperor,  who  had  left  Illyria  and  was  on  his 

^  Athan.  de  Synod.  §§  3,  4,  8. 

2  The  S.E.  region  of  Asia  Minor,  S.  of  Cappadocia,  and  between 
Pamphylia  on  the  West,  and  Cilicia  on  the  East. 

3  For  the  history,  see  Sulpic.  Sever,  ii.  41,  54 — 56;  Socr.  ii.  37  ; 
Sozom.  iv.  17  ;  Theodoret,  ii.  17  ;  Concil.  General,  ii.  792  ;  Athan.  de 
Synod.  §  i— §  12;  Hilar,  de  Synod,  p.  463;  ad  Const,  p.  566;  Frag, 
pp.  689,673,701-705. 


134     Episcopal  deputies  of  Rimini  overreached  by  Ariaus. 

march  to  Persia,  made  no  reply  to  the  message,  but 
said  that  he  was  too  busy  to  attend  to  it.  He  was 
disappointed  by  the  non-reception  of  the  Sirmian 
Creed,  which  was  inspired  by  himself.  Inferring  also 
from  the  incompetency  of  the  youthful  and  inex- 
perienced envoys,  that  the  Bishops  whom  they  repre- 
sented were  of  little  worth,  he  treated  them  with 
indifference. 

The  Arians  had  also  sent  emissaries  to  the  Emperor, 
who  were  abler  men,  and  were  better  received.  The 
Emperor  wrote  to  the  Council  that  he  was  on  his 
road  to  Persia,  and  would  consider  their  message  on 
his  return  to  Adrianople.  The  Bishops  who  were 
detained  at  Rimini,  renewed  their  request  to  be 
allowed  to  return  home  before  winter,  which  was 
approaching. 

In  the  mean  time  the  Arians,  who  were  at  Nice  in 
Thracia,  invited  the  Catholic  delegates  of  the  Council 
to  meet  them  there,  and  by  subtle  ingenuity  and  dint 
of  importunity,  prevailed  on  them  to  sign  a  formula 
similar  to  that  of  Sirmium,  and  to  revoke  the  sentence 
of  condemnation  which  had  been  pronounced  by 
the  Council  against  Valens,  Ursacius,  and  their  as- 
sociates, who  now  came  in  triumph  to  Rimini. 

The  envoys,  having  thus  fallen  into  the  snare  laid 
for  them  by  the  Arians,  returned  to  Rimini.  And 
now  the  Emperor  appeared  on  the  scene.  By  a 
rescript  sent  by  the  Praefect  Taurus,  he  forbade  the 
Bishops  to  quit  Rimini  till  they  had  subscribed  the 
formula  which  had  been  accepted  by  their  envoys  ; 
and  he  gave  orders  that  the  leaders  of  the  Catholic 
party  should  be  banished  if  they  declined  to  do  so. 
Indignant  remonstrances  were  uttered  by  the  most 
zealous   among   them.      But  at   length,   alarmed    by 


The  Bishops  of  Rimijii yield  to  coercion— Triumpli  of  135 
Arianism. 
threats,  wearied  out  by  delays,  after  seven  months' 
stay,  and  with  winter  at  hand,  and  eager  to  return 
home,  they  yielded  one  by  one  ;  and,  being  beguiled 
by  the  fallacious  language  of  Valens  and  his  friends, 
they  subscribed  a  specious  formula  which  affirmed 
that  the  Son  was  not  a  creature  like  other  creatures ; 
and  so,  in  fine,  what  at  first  showed  so  fair  was  utterly 
blighted,  and  the  Council  of  Rimini  melted  away. 

The  consternation  thus  caused  is  described  by 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  Jerome,  and  Augustine,  whose 
words  have  been  quoted  already/ 

The  Council  of  the  Easterns  at  Seleucia'  was  held 
in  the  month  of  September  in  the  same  year,  A.D. 
359.  About  160  Bishops  met,  chiefly  Semi-Arians. 
Leonas,  the  Imperial  Treasurer,  was  present  at  its 
sessions  in  the  Church  of  S.  Thecla.  Fortunately, 
however,  S.  Hilary,  who  had  been  three  years  an 
exile  in  Phrygia,  was  there.  The  Council  declined 
the  word  con  substantial,  because  it  was  alleged  to  be 
obscure.  But  at  the  same  time  they  condemned  as 
heretical  the  word  anomocan  (unlike)  as  applied  to  the 
Son  in  His  relation  to  the  Father,  and  excommunicated 
the  leading  Arians,  Acacius  of  Caesarea,  Eudoxius  of 
Antioch,  George  of  Alexandria,  Leontius  of  Tripoli, 
and  others. 

But  this  Semi-Arian  triumph,  like  others  of  the 
same  kind,  was  destined  to  be  of  short  duration. 

The  Arian  deputies  from  Rimini,  Ursacius,  Valens, 
and  others,  united  themselves  to  those  who  had  been 
condemned  by  the  Semi-Arians  at  Seleucia,  and  who 
declared  themselves  ready  to  accept  the  formula  which 

*  See  above,  chap.  i.  pp.  19,  20.  See  also  S.  Ambrose,  Epist,  xxi. 
ad  Valentin.  §  I5- 

»  For  the  history,  see  Athan.  de  Synod.  §  12;  Theodoret,  ii.  22  ; 
Sozom.  iv.  22  ;  Socr.  ii.  39  ;  Concil.  General,  ii.  804. 


136  S.  Hilarys  speecfi  to  Constantius. 

the  Council  of  Rimini,  at  the  instigation  of  the  Arians, 
had  accepted  ;  and  thus  the  West  was  brought  to 
bear  upon  the  East  in  favour  of  Arianism.  They 
held  a  Council  at  Constantinople.®  Hilary  was  there 
present,  and  made  an  able  appeal  to  the  Emperor.' 
"  I  am  a  Bishop,"  he  says,  "  in  communion  with  all 
the  Bishops  of  Gaul  ;  and  though  in  exile,  I  communi- 
cate with  them  still  by  means  of  Presbyters.  I  have 
been  banished  for  no  fault  of  mine,  but.  by  faction  of 
others.  However,  I  will  say  nothing  of  my  own 
banishment,  unless  thou  biddest  me.  But  I  plead  for 
the  Faith.  I  plead  because  I  tremble  for  the  World's 
peril,  and  for  the  sin  of  silence  on  my  part,  and  for 
the  judgment  of  God  ;  and  I  am  alarmed  not  for  my 
own  life  and  immortality,  but  for  thine,  and  for  that 
of  all  men.  Recognize,  I  pray  thee,  the  faith,  which 
thou,  O  most  excellent  and  most  religious  Emperor, 
desirest  to  hear  from  Bishops,  and  which  thou  dost 
not  hear  from  them.  For  while  they  from  whom  thou 
askest  it,  write  down  their  own  words,  and  not  the  words 
of  God,  they  have  been  whirled  around  on  a  restless 
wheel  of  error  and  endless  strife.  We  are  nowadays 
eager  for  new  Creeds,  because  we  have  lost  the  old 
faith.  The  faith  itself  has  become  a  thing  of  times 
and  seasons,  rather  than  of  Scripture.  Every  year 
gives  birth  to  a  new  Creed.  There  are  as  many  faiths 
as  wills,  as  many  dogmas  as  tempers.  Blasphemies 
sprout  up  with  our  vices  ;  and  whereas  there  is  one 
Faith,  one  Lord,  one  Baptism,  we  have  quitted  that 
faith  which  is  one,  and  one  only  ;  and  by  multiplying 
our  faiths,  we  have  ceased  to  have  any.  Since  we  have 
drifted  away  from  Nicsea,  we  have  done  nothing  else 

«  Sozom.  iv.  23.    Theodoret,  ii,  23 — 26.    Concil.  General,  ii.  805. 
7  Hilar,  ad  Constantium  Augustum,  ii.  p.  543. 


The  Aria?i  Creed  of  Ri7nini  is  accepted.  137 

but  fabricate  new  Creeds  ;  and  while  one  man  ana- 
thematizes another,  we  all  cease  to  be  Christ's.  Let 
us  then  return  to  the  old  Faith,  and  after  our  long 
and  tempestuous  voyage  let  us  find  a  harbour  there." 

Hilary  asked  for  an  audience,  but  the  Arians  de- 
clined the  challenge,  and  persuaded  the  Emperor  to 
send  him  back  to  Gaul  as  a  turbulent  man  who  sowed 
strife  in  the  East. 

Eventually  the  Arians  at  Constantinople  adopted 
the  Creed  of  Rimini,  and  constrained  the  Semi-Arians 
to  subscribe  it ;  not  without  a  protest  on  the  part  of 
some.  Among  them  they  sacrificed  Aetius  as  a 
scape-goat ;  they  deposed  him  as  refractory,  but  did 
not  call  him  a  heretic. 

They  deposed  Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  the  head  of  the 
Semi-Arians,  and  Eustathius  of  Sebaste,  not  on  the 
charge  of  heresy,  but  for  admitting  an  unchaste  deacon 
to  communion  ;  and  Macedonius  of  Constantinople,^ 
and  placed  one  of  their  own  leaders,  Eudoxius,  in  his 
room,  on  January  27,  A.D.  360,  who,  soon  after  his 
enthronement  there,  uttered  words  of  impiety  against 
the  Father  and  the  Son  at  the  dedication  of  the 
Church  of  S.  Sophia,  February  the  15th.  Finally 
they  ordered  that  the  decrees  of  the  Council  of 
Rimini  should  be  diffused  everywhere,  and  their  order 
was  accompanied  by  a  proclamation  from  the  Emperor 
that  whoever  refused  to  accept  it  should  be  banished. 

Thus  Arianism  appeared  to  have  triumphed  in 
Christendom.  Even  the  city  where  the  "disciples 
were  first  called  Christians,"  ^  Antioch,  became  the 
scene  of  its  victory.  At  the  end  of  A.D.  360,  Constan- 
tius  was  there.  Eudoxius,  its  Arian  Bishop,  had  just 
been   translated   to    Constantinople.     Meletius,    who 

8  Socr.  ii.  42,  43.     Sozom.  iv.  24.  ^  Acts  xi.  26. 


138  Meletius  at  Antioch — Proverbs  v\\\.  22. 

had  been  elected  Bishop  of  Sebaste,  but  had  retired 
from  it,  was  respected  by  both  parties,  and  was  chosen 
to  succeed  Eudoxius  at  Antioch.  But  having  been 
desired  by  the  Emperor  to  preach  to  the  people  on  the 
text  Proverbs  viii.  22 — a  stronghold  of  the  Arians  ' — he 
offended  them  by  his  Catholic"  exposition^  of  those 
words,  which  had  been  interpreted  in  an  Arian  sense 
in  a  previous  sermon  by  George  of  Laodicea,  and 
in  a  neutral  one  by  Acacius  of  C^sarea.  They 
therefore  persuaded  the  Emperor  to  quash  the  elec- 
tion, and  to  send  him  to  Armenia,  his  own  country. 
Euzoius,  one  of  the  first  disciples  of  Arius,  and  an 
eager  partisan  of  his  doctrines,  was  placed  in  his 
room  ;  and  under  him  a  Council  was  held  at  Antioch, 
which  published  a  still  more  heretical  Creed  even  than 
that  of  Rimini,  and  declared  in  that,  that  the  Son  was 
in  all  respects  unlike  the  Father.'*  Thus  they  identi- 
fied themselves  v^\\}Li\}i\^  Anoviceans  2.x\A  ExoiicontianSy 
as  they  were  called,  that  is,  with  those  who  affirmed 
that  the  Son  was  not  begotten  of  the  Father,  nor  even 
created  by  Him  out  of  Himself,  but  out  of  t J  lings  that 
did  710 1  before  e.xist  (ef  ovk  ovtodv),^  and  was  not  there- 
fore a  Son  at  all. 

But  now,  when  their  triumph  seemed  to  be  com- 
plete, their  defeat  was  at  hand. 

Julian,  an  apostate  from  the  faith,  was  chosen  by 
God  to  avenge  it.  The  Imperial  Patron  of  the  Arians, 
Constantius,    heard    with   alarm   at    Caesarea,    when 

'  KvpLos  eKTiae  /xe.  As  to  the  Ai-jan  use  of  that  text,  may  I  refer  to  the 
note  on  it  in  my  Commentary  on  the  Book  of  Proverbs  ? 

2  Which  he  iUustrated  by  first  holding  out  three  of  his  fingers,  and 
then  withdrawing  two,  and  leaving  one. 

^  Preserved  by  Epiphanius,  Hcer.  73. 

4  Athan.  de  Synod.  §  31. 

5  See  above,  vol.  i.  p.  446. 


Julian  renoimces  Christianity— marches  against  139 
Consta7itius— Death  of  Consiantius. 
entering  on  his  campaign  against  Persia,  that  Julian, 
his  cousin,  whom  he  had  appointed  Caesar  in  the  West, 
had  been  saluted  Augustus  by  his  soldiers  at  Paris, 
and  was  marching  against  him.  At  Vienne  in  Gaul, 
on  the  feast  of  Epiphany,  January  6,  A.D.  361, 
Julian,  now  a  pagan  at  heart,  worshipped  in  a  Chris- 
tian Church  ;  but  he  passed  on  eastward  to  Sirmium 
—the  scene  of  Arian  Councils— whence  the  Creed  of 
Rimini  had  sprung,  and  there  publicly  renounced 
Christianity.^ 

Constantius,  having  proceeded  to  Edessa  in  his 
campaign  against  Sapor,  King  of  Persia,  and  having 
learnt  that  the  Persians  had  retreated,  marched  back 
rapidly  toward  Antioch. 

At  Tarsus  he  was  seized  by  a  slight  attack  of  fever, 
which  he  hoped  would  soon  pass  away  ;  but  he  was 
obliged  to  halt  at  Mopsucrene  in  Cilicia,  where,  per- 
ceiving himself  to  be  near  his  end,"  he  received  bap- 
tism from  Euzoius,  the  Arian  Bishop  of  Antioch. 
He  died  on  the  4th  of  November,  A.D.  361,  in  the 
forty-fifth  year  of  his  age,  and  twenty-fifth  of  his 
reign. 

It  is  stated  by  Gregory  Nazianzen,^  who  is  more 
favourable  to  him  than  any  other  of  the  Christian 
Fathers,^  that  he  showed  great  and  special  remorse 
for  three  things :  that  he  had  slain  so  many  of  his 
kindred  ;  that  he  had  advanced  Julian  to  the  Empire; 
and  that  he  had  tampered  with  the  Faith. 

His  reign  was  tarnished  by  many  and  great  crimes, 

6  Julian,  Epist.  38  ad  Maximum  pliilosophum. 

7  Athan.  de  Synod.  §  31. 

8  Orat.  xxi.  §  26  :  Thv  rov  yivovs  <p6vov,  Ka\  t^u  avapprio^tt^  toD 
'ATroo-TttTou,  Kcl  T7;f  KaivoToiJi.lavTri<i  Trio-Tews.      Cp.  Theodoret,  iii.  I. 

9  See  his  Orat.  iv.  §§  3,  21,  37,  and  the  Benedictine  Editor's  preface 
to  it,  p.  76. 


140  Review  of  the  reign  of  Consta7itius. 

which  were  due  to  his  counsellors,  such  as  Eusebius  his 
Chamberlain,  and  the  Bishops  of  his  court,  rather  than 
to  himself.  He  was  capricious  and  vacillating,  and 
on  account  of  the  rapidly  succeeding  ebb  and  flow  of 
his  fickle  and  inconstant  purposes,  he  was  called  an 
'^Euripus.  "^  But  he  was  also  very  wayward  and 
peremptory,  and  dictated  the  edicts  of  his  will  as  if 
they  were  canons  of  the  Church.^ 

But  his  reign  was  overruled  for  good  to  the  Church, 
by  teaching  her  not  to  put  her  trust  in  Princes,  and 
by  exercising  and  manifesting  the  power  of  God's 
grace,  in  the  faith,  patience,  and  courage  of  noble 
Confessors,  especially  Athanasius,  whose  Episcopate 
in  the  reign  of  Constantius  was  a  continual  martyr- 
dom ;  and  also  as  showing  that  there  is  no  solid 
foundation  for  Christianity,  except  in  the  main- 
tenance of  that  doctrine  for  which  Athanasius  con- 
tended, that  the  Son  of  God  is  "  God  of  God,  Light  of 
Light,  Very  God  of  Very  God,  Begotten,  not  made, 
being  of  one  substance  with  the  Father." 

In  reviewing  the  history  from  the  death  of  Con- 
stantine  (a.D.  337)  to  that  of  Constantius  (a.d.  361), 
we  should  remember  that  many  legislative  enact- 
ments were  made  for  the  suppression  of  heathenism  in 
A.D.  341,^  and  especially  A.D.  353*  for  the  abolition  of 
sacrifices — even  on  the  pain  of  death — and  for  the 
closing  of  heathen  temples.  And  although  these 
enactments  could  not  be  everywhere  put  in  force, 
especially  in  such  Cities  as  Rome  and  Alexandria, 
yet  they  had  the  salutary  effect  of  diminishing  the 

1  Theodoret,  ii.  27. 

2  (ixrnep  iyci}  ^SowAo/uoj,  tovto  Kavoov  po[xl(((t6ci>,  Athan.  ad  ISlon.  §  33. 
Cp.  Cave,  Hist.  Lit.  {.215. 

3  Cod.  Theodos.  lib.  xvi.  tit.  10,  i  and  3. 
*  Ibid.  xvi.  10,  4. 


Missions  to  the  heat  hen.  141 

influence  of  Heathenism,  and  of  opening  the  eyes  of 
the  people  to  the  frauds  practised  in  its  temples  by 
those  who  officiated  in  them.  The  term  pagan,  which 
arose  about  this  time,  marked  the  retirement  of 
Heathenism  from  towns  into  villages, /(S-^/.^ 

Many  laws  were  made  by  Constantine  and  Con- 
stantius,  which  exempted  Bishops  and  Clergy  from 
military  service  and  from  sundry  taxes,^  and  provided 
endowments  for  them."^ 

Reference  has  been  already  made  to  the  spread  of 
Christianity  in  Ethiopia,^  and  also  among  the 
Goths.  The  Gospel  had  been  propagated  in 
Armenia  by  Gregory  ^'the  Illuminator,"  consecrated 
Metropolitan  of  Armenia  in  A.D.  302.^  And  the 
presence  of  Bishops  of  Gaul  at  the  Council  of  Rome, 
A.D.  313,  and  of  British  Bishops  at  the  Council  of 
Aries,  A.D.  314,  and  the  influence  exercised  by 
Hosius,  Bishop  of  Corduba  in  Spain,  during  the 
reigns  of  Constantine  and  Constantius,  attested  the 
spread  of  the  Gospel  in  the  West. 

The  seemingly  casual  manner  in  which  the  Seed 
of  the  Gospel  is  ever  being  scattered  in  the  field  of 
the  World,  "  and  springs  up  and  grows,"  no  man 
knows  how,^  was  exemplified  also  about  this  time 
in  Iberia — the  modern  Georgia — on  the  shores  of  the 

5  The  first  legal  use  of  the  term  "  paganus  "  in  an  imperial  edict  was 
in  A.D.  368.  Cod.  Theod.  xvi.  2,  I.  Cp.  Gibbon,  ch.  xxi.  at  end; 
Abp.  Ti-ench  on  Words,  p.  130  ;  Gieseler,  i.  308  ;  Neander,  iii.  93. 

^  These  immunities  were  in  some  respects  hurtful,  as  tempting 
unworthy  persons  into  Holy  Orders.  Athan.  Hist.  Arian.  ad  Mon. 
§  78.     Basil,  Epist.  54.     De  Broglie,  iii.  129. 

7  Euseb.  de  Vit.  Const,  iv.  28.     Sozom.  i.         Theodoret,  iv,  4. 

®  Above,  p.  43. 

"  Sozom.  ii.  8. 

^  Mark  iv.  26,  27,  which  is  well  illustrated  by  Professor  Blunt  in 
his  Church  Histoiy,  ch.  v.  p.  92. 


142     spread  of  the  Gospel  in  Georgia — Persia  — Arabia. 

Black  Sea.  A  Christian  woman  was  carried  captive 
to  that  country,^  whose  holy  life  attracted  attention, 
and  led  to  inquiry  concerning  her  faith.  "  I  serve 
Christ,  my  God/'  was  the  answer.  A  mother  brought 
to  her  a  sick  child.  "  I  cannot  heal  it ;  but  there  is 
One  who  can,"  said  the  captive:  she  prayed  to  Christ, 
and  the  child  was  restored  to  health.  The  Queen  of 
Iberia  was  suffering  from  a  painful  disease,  and 
desired  her  to  come  and  cure  her.  She  declined  to 
go,  lest  she  should  seem  to  think  too  highly  of  her 
own  powers.  The  Queen  came  to  her;  the  captive 
prayed  earnestly,  and  the  Queen  was  healed.  The 
King  sent  presents  to  the  captive,  but  the  Queen  told 
him  that  the  woman  desired  no  other  reward  than 
his  conversion  to  Christianity.  He  delayed  for  a 
time  ;  but  one  day,  being  in  danger  and  distress,  he 
bethought  himself  of  the  request,  and  prayed  to  Christ, 
and  was  delivered  from  his  peril.  He  therefore  sent 
for  the  captive  woman,  and  told  her  that  he  would 
serve  no  other  God  but  hers ;  and  he  asked  her 
how  her  God  was  to  be  served.  She  did  what  she 
could  to  inform  him,  and  asked  him  to  build  a 
Church.  The  King  and  Queen  complied  with  the 
request,  and  sent  an  embassy  to  Constantine,  that  a 
Bishop  and  Clergy  might  come  to  them.  The  Church 
in  Persia  was  ennobled  by  16,000  martyrs  (a.D.  343. 
Sozom.  ii.  14),  and  the  Arabian  Homerites  joyfully 
received  the  Gospel  (Philost.  iii.  4). 

In  reading,  therefore,  the  narrative  of  the  unhappy 
strifes  in  the  Church  during  this  period,  we  may 
derive  comfort  from  the  reflection  that  the  Gospel  was 
all  the  while  making  quiet  and  steady  progress  in 
almost  all  parts  of  the  Empire,  and  that  the  prophe- 
cies contained  in  the  divine  parables  concerning  the 

2  Rufin.  i.  10.     Socr.  i.  20. 


S.  Cyril  on  the  effects  of  the  Gospel — and  on  strifes  143 
i7i  the  Church. 
grain  of  mustard  seed,  and  the  leaven,^  were  in  course  of 
fulfilment  at  that  time.  Some  interesting  remarks  on 
these  points  were  made  by  S.  Cyril,  priest  and  after- 
wards Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  in  his  catechetical 
lectures  on  the  Creed,  delivered  to  candidates  for 
baptism  in  the  season  of  Lent,  in  one  of  the  Churches 
of  that  city,  in  A.D.  347  or  348.  "  The  very  fact  of 
your  presence  proves  the  power  of  the  Crucified. 
What,"  he  says*  (preaching  on  the  article  of  the 
Creed  "  He  was  crucified  "),  "  has  brought  you  hither  ? 
What  soldiers  have  forced  you  to  come  t  By 
what  chains  have  you  been  drawn  }  By  what 
judicial  sentence  have  you  been  driven.?  By  none  of 
these  things.  No  ;  it  is  the  salutary  trophy  of  the 
Cross  that  has  done  it.  The  Cross  has  vanquished 
the  Persians,  and  tamed  the  Scythians,  and  has  given 
to  the  Egyptians  the  knowledge  and  worship  of  the 
true  God,  instead  of  cats  and  dogs,  and  has  freed 
them  from  their  manifold  errors.  The  Cross,  even  to 
this  day,  heals  diseases,  and  casts  out  devils,  and  over- 
throws the  impostures  of  sorcerers  and  enchanters." 

Cyril  tells  his  hearers  also  that  the  intestine  con- 
flicts of  the  Church  during  the  reign  of  Constantius 
were  the  appointed  trials  of  their  faith  and  charity, 
and  in  this  respect  might  be  made  profitable  by  them. 
"  If  you  hear  (says  he  to  his  Catechumens  ^  about 
A.D.  347)  that  Bishops  are  striving  against  Bishops,  and 
Clergy  against  Clergy,  and  Laity  against  Laity,  even 
unto  blood,  be  not  disturbed  thereby ;  for  these 
things  were  foretold  by  Christ.  Mind  not  what 
now  happens,  but  attend  to  what  is  written  in  Scrip- 


3  Matt.  xiii.  31,  33. 

*  S.  Cyril  Hierosol.  Cateches.  xiii.  40,  p,  202,  ed.  Venet.  1763. 

'  Ibid.  XV.  7,  p.  227. 


144    Errors  and  strifes  m  the  Church,  leading  to  trials 

and  triumphs. 
ture.  If  \j  who  am  your  Teacher,  perish,  do  not  you 
therefore  perish  with  me.  The  disciple  may  be  above 
his  master  ;  the  last  may  be  first.  If  there  was  a  traitor 
among  the  Apostles,  why  should  we  wonder  that  there 
is  strife  among  Bishops  now  }  Here  is  a  sign  of  the 
latter  days.  *  Iniquity  will  abound,  and  charity 
wax  cold.'  ^  But  there  is  another  sign  also.  '  This 
Gospel  of  the  Kingdom  will  first  be  preached  in  all 
the  world,  and  then  will  the  end  come.'  ^  This  is 
being  fulfilled  also." 

"  The  Teacher's  error  is  the  People's  trial.'^  This 
saying  (as  has  been  already  noticed^)  is  verified  in 
every  age  of  the  Church's  History,  and  was  never 
more  clearly  exemplified  than  in  the  days  of  Con- 
stantius.  But  the  People  bore  the  trial  nobly.  Their 
faith  was  made  more  illustrious  by  the  defection  of 
many  of  the  Episcopate.^  In  the  words  of  S.  Hilary, 
"  The  hearts  of  the  People  were  holier  than  the  lips 
of  the  Priests."     The  trial  led  to  a  triumph. 

At  the  same  time  it  must  be  remembered  that  the 
steadfastness  of  the  People  was  mainly  due,  under 
God,  to  the  example  and  teaching  of  the  greatest 
Bishop  of  Christendom,  Athanasius. 

The  body  of  Constantius  was  carried,  under  the 
conduct  of  Jovian,  the  future  Emperor,  to  Constanti- 
nople, where  Julian,  the  successor  of  Constantius, 
and  predecessor  of  Jovian,  arrived  on  the  nth  day 
of  December  in  the  year  361. 

6  Matt.  xxiv.  12.  ''  Matt.  xxiv.  14.  ^  Vol.  i.  p.  317. 

9  One  of  the  most  interesting  and  instructive  portions  of  Cardinal 
Newman's  work  on  the  Arians,  pp.  445 — 468,  ed.  1876,  is  occupied 
with  a  full  demonstration  of  this  truth  from  the  history  of  those  times. 


CHAPTER  V. 

Frovi  the  Accession  of  Julian ,  Nov.  4,  A.D.  361,  to 
his  death,  June  26,  A.D.  363. 

The  accession  of  Julian  to  the  throne  of  the  Roman 
World,  was  marked  by  extraordinary  events.  In  the 
general  massacre  of  his  nearest  relatives  at  the  death 
of  Constantine,  A.D.  337,  Julian  and  his  elder  brother 
Gallus  had  alone  escaped.  Gallus  was  spared,  because 
it  was  thought  that  he  could  not  long  survive  ;  Julian 
was  allowed  to  live,  on  account  of  his  tender  age  ; 
and  no  one  then  dreamt  that  he  could  ever  be  a 
candidate  for  the  imperial  crown.  It  is  said  that  he 
owed  his  life  to  Mark,  Bishop  of  Arethusa,  who  gave 
him  shelter  in  his  Church.^ 

The  family  of  Constantine  seemed  destined  in  all 
human  probability  to  form  a  dynasty  for  many  genera- 
tions. He  left  three  sons  in  the  flower  of  their  age, 
and  in  vigorous  health.  But  this  bright  promise  of  a 
lineal  succession  was  not  realized.  Constantine,  the 
eldest  son,  who  invaded  the  dominions  of  his  brother 
Constans,  was  killed  in  a  skirmish  in  A.D.  340. 
Constans,  who  thus  became  Emperor  of  the  West, 
died  early  in  A.D.  350,  in  the  rebellion  of  Magnentius. 
Neither  of  the  two  brothers  left  any  issue.  At  the 
death  of  Constans,  Constantius  became  sole  Emperor 

»  Cp.  Greg.  Nazian.  Orat.  iv.  91,  who  refers  to  the  fact  that  Mark 
was  afterwards  a  martyr  for  the  faith  under  Julian. 

VOL.   II.  L 


146     The  Emperor  Julian — disadvantages  of  his  early  life. 

of  the  Roman  World.  He  was  three  times  married, 
but  also  died  childless.  It  would  seem  as  if  a  blight 
fell  on  the  family  of  Constantine,  who  had  not  spared 
his  own  wife  Fausta,  and  his  own  son  Crispus  ;  and 
whose  example  was  imitated  by  his  children,  especially 
Constantius,  who  cleared  the  way  to  an  undisputed 
succession  to  the  throne,  by  the  murder  of  their  own 
kindred.  Nor  was  this  all.  Julian's  elder  brother, 
Gallus,  who  had  been  appointed  Caesar  by  Constan- 
tius, was  killed  by  the  order  of  the  Emperor,  his 
cousin,  in  the  year  A.D.  354.     Julian  alone  remained. 

Julian  is  entitled  to  compassion  on  account  of 
the  unloveliness  and  unlovingness  of  his  early  asso- 
ciations. He  had  been  treated  with  coldness  and 
harshness  by  his  cousin  Constantius,  who  had  been 
accessory  to  the  murder  of  many  of  his  nearest 
relatives.  He  had  been  kept  by  him  almost  a 
prisoner  in  obscure  seclusion  and  banishment,  and 
under  jealous  espionage  ;  he  had  received  little  sym- 
pathy from  any  of  the  imperial  Court,  except 
Eusebia,  one  of  the  consorts  of  Constantius  ;2  and  he 
was  placed  under  the  hard,  cold,  and  semi-sceptical 
tuition  of  Arianism.  How  different  might  have  been 
his  career,  if,  instead  of  being  committed  to  the  charge 
of  the  ambitious  and  unscrupulous  worldly  politician, 
Eusebius,  Bishop  of  Nicomedia,he  had  been  entrusted 
to  the  care  of  Athanasius. 

Being  chilled  and  soured  by  early  neglect  and  ill- 
usage,  and  exasperated  by  a  sense  of  wrong,  and  left 
almost  alone  without  friends  and  relatives  (except 
his  brother,  who  was  of  a  very  different  temperament), 
and  with  no  opportunity  for   the  genial    exercise    of 

-  AVho,  however,  is  said  to  have  dealt  in  a  most  unfeeling  manner 
with  Helena,  her  sister-in-law,  Julian's  wife  :  see  note  in  p.  147. 


Early  injluences,  and  sudden  elevation.  147 

kindly  affections,  he  had  been  tempted  to  practise 
insincerity  and  dissimulation,  by  the  envious  sur- 
veillance exercised  over  him  ;  and  being  disgusted 
with  the  wrangling  of  angry  polemical  disputants 
among  Christian  Bishops,  he  was  exposed  to  the 
flattery  of  heathen  sophists  and  rhetoricians,  who 
agreed  in  regarding  him  with  hope  as  their  future 
patron  and  champion,  and  as  the  destined  restorer  of 
pagan  Literature  and  Religion. 

On  the  death  of  Callus,  Julian  had  been  appointed 
C^Esar.  He  was  protected  and  patronized  by  Eusebia, 
the  wife  of  Constantius,  and  was  nominated  to  his  new 
dignity  by  Constantius  at  Milan,  on  Nov.  6,  A.D.  355, 
who  gave  him  his  sister  Helena  in  marriage.^  But 
in  A.D.  360  he  was  saluted  Augustus  by  his  soldiers, 
and  having  received  a  menacing  letter  from  the 
Emperor,  he  was  urged  by  them  to  march  toward  the 
East  to  encounter  Constantius,  who  had  acted  on  the 
instigation  of  his  own  soldiery,  when  he  killed  Julian's 
father,  Julius  Constantius,  the  brother  of  Constantine, 
to  make  way  for  himself  to  the  throne. 

When  Julian  was  in  Dacia,  in  the  winter  of  A.D.  361, 
he  received  the  intelligence  that  Constantius  was 
dead,  and  found  himself  undisputed  Master  of  the 
Roman  World.  His  cousins,  the  three  sons  of  Con- 
stantine, had  been  only  imperial  triumvirs  at  their 
father's  death  ;  but  Julian,  the  despised  orphan,  was 
raised  suddenly  to  no  such  divided  dominion,  but 
was  sole  Augustus  at  once  without  any  rival  of  his 
power. 

3  Helena  died  childless  a  little  before  the  death  of  her  brother 
Constantius  and  the  accession  of  her  husband  and  cousin  Julian,  who 
never  married  again.  It  is  said  (by  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xvi.  10)  that 
tlie  Empress  "  Eusebia,  ipsa  sterilis,  venenum  bibere  per  fraudem  illexit 
(Uelenam)  ut  quotiescunque  concepisset,  immaturum  abjiceret  partunu" 
L    2 


148  Reign  of  Julian;  its  special  interest — Judicial  retribution. 

The  reign  of  Julian,  though  short  in  duration — not 
much  more  than  one  year  and  a  half — is  one  which  in 
its  relation  to  the  Christian  Church  is  perhaps  of  deeper 
interest,  in  some  respects,  than  that  of  any  other 
Roman  Emperor.^  It  would  seem  that,  unconsciously, 
he  was  made  an  instrument  in  the  hands  of  her 
Divine  Head  for  the  most  important  ends.  And 
even  the  shortness  of  his  reign  brings  out  this  its 
character  with  greater  clearness  and  intensity. 

Soon  after  his  accession  to  the  throne,  he  established 
a  Correctional  Tribunal  for  inquiry  into  the  mal- 
administration of  those  who  had  held  the  highest 
places  under  his  predecessor.  One  of  the  first  who 
was  brought  to  trial,  and  was  capitally  condemned, 
was  Eusebius,  the  celebrated  Chief  of  the  Eunuchs, 
and  Chamberlain  of  Constantius,  who  had  been  raised 
from  low  estate  to  the  highest  dignity,  and  had  been 
the  prime  mover  in  all  the  designs  in  favour  of  Arian- 
ism,^  and  against  the  Church,  in  his  reign. 

Taurus,  who  had  gained  the  Consulship  by  acts  of 
violence,  especially  at  the  heretical  Council  of  Rimini, 
and  had  enforced  heresy  on  the  Church,  was  another 
victim  of  the  same  retribution,  made  more  bitter  to 
him  by  the  legal  formula  of  his  impeachment^,  entitled 
"  In  the  Consulship  of  Taurus,  Taurus  is  arraigned."  ^ 

Another  person,  who  was  celebrated  as  the  framer 
of  the  notorious  ''  dated  Creed  "  of  Sirmium,  May  22, 
^•D.  359,    Marcus^   of  Arethusa,  was  executed    also 

"*  On  the  reign  and  character  of  Julian,  let  me  refer  to  the  excellent 
article  on  Julian,  written  for  Professor  Wace's  Dictionary  of  Christian 
Biography  by  Canon  Wordsworth,  which  I  have  had  the  advantage  of 
seeing  before  its  publication. 

^  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxii.  3.      Socr.  iii.  I. 

6  Ibid. 

^  See  above,  pp.  132,  133. 


Examples  of  rdrihutivejicstice  —  Ciixumstances  1 49 
favourable  to  Heathenism. 
under  Julian,  but  by  a  nobler  death  ;  ^  he  fell  by 
the  hands  of  a  heathen  populace  encouraged  by 
Julian's  patronage  of  paganism.  Another  leader  of 
heresy,  George  of  Cappadocia,  who  had  usurped  the 
see  of  Athanasius  in  A.D.  356,  and  had  perpetrated 
savage  cruelties  and  sacrilegious  outrages  on  the 
Catholics  of  Alexandria,  and  in  the  Churches  there, 
suffered  barbarous  enormities  in  his  own  person  in 
that  city  from  a  heathen  mob^  under  Julian  in  A.D. 
362.  It  is  noteworthy  that  both  the  intruders  into 
the  see  of  Athanasius,  Gregory  and  George,  died  at 
Alexandria  after  a  short  Episcopate,  while  the  life  of 
Athanasius,  the  Catholic  Bishop,  though  in  continual 
peril,  was  preserved  for  nearly  fifty  years. 

But  the  reign  of  Julian  was  still  more  remarkable 
in  another  view.  It  was  the  latest  reign  in  which 
Heathenism  was  brought  into  direct  antagonism  to 
Christianity ;  and  that  antagonism  was  in  some 
respects  more  dangerous  to  it  than  under  any  other 
Roman  Emperor. 

The  time  itself  was  unfavourable  to  the  Church. 
She  had  been  torn  asunder  by  Arianism,  and  that  in- 
testine warfare  had  been  waged  for  a  quarter  of  a 
century.  Synods  had  striven  against  Synods  ; 
Bishops  had  anathematized  Bishops.  Many  faithful 
Bishops  were  in  exile,  and  their  sees  occupied  by 
usurpers.  And  after  the  Council  of  Rimini,  a  short 
time  before  the  accession  of  Julian,  Christendom  was 
almost  in  despondency,  produced  by  general  dis- 
ruption. 

The  bitter  animosities,  malignant   calumnies,   and 

*  Theodoret,  iii.  3.  Sozom.  v.  10.  On  his  martyrdom,  see  Tille- 
mont,  vii.  367,  726. 

9  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxii.  ii.     Epiphan.  Hseres.  76.     Sozom.  v.  7. 


150  Julianas  qualifications  for  warfare  against  Christianity. 

barbarous  cruelties  of  Christians  fighting  against 
Christians,  had  prejudiced^  Julian  against  Christianit}^, 
and  exposed  it  to  his  attacks.  Julian  himself  also, 
who  led  the  campaign  against  Christianity,  was 
singularly  qualified  for  a  successful  warfare  against 
it.  He  wielded  the  power  of  the  Roman  Empire. 
He  had  made  personal  trial  of  Christianity,  and  had 
renounced  it.  He  had  been  trained  under  a  Christian 
Bishop,  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  ;  he  had  not  only  been 
baptized  early  in  life — which  was  not  the  case  with  his 
Christian  predecessors — he  had  officiated,  as  a  Reader, 
in  the  ministry  of  the  Church  ;  he  openly  professed 
Christianity  till  he  was  twenty  years  of  age,  and  then, 
in  the  ripeness  of  manhood,  and  in  the  exercise  of  a 
deliberate  judgment,  he  publicly  renounced  it.  It 
could  not  be  said  that  he  was  tempted  to  abandon  it 
by  motives  of  earthly  policy.  The  Roman  Empire 
was  on  the  side  of  Christianity.  It  had  seen  five 
Christian  Rulers — his  uncle  Constantine,  his  three 
cousins,  Constantine,  Constans,  and  Constantius,  and 
his  brother  Gallus.  The  Christian  Labarum  had  for 
nearly  half  a  century  displaced  the  Roman  Eagle 
from  the  standard  of  the  Legions.  The  Capital  of  the 
Empire,  Constantinople,  dedicated  in  A.D.  330,  was  a 
Christian  city  ;  no  Heathen  Temple  was  to  be  seen 
in  it. 

In  these  respects  the  hostility  of  Julian  to  Chris- 
tianity was  of  a  very  different  character  from  that  of 
any  of  his  pagan  predecessors  who  persecuted  the 
Church,  such  as  Decius  or  Diocletian.  It  was  far 
more  formidable.  It  appeared  to  be  the  result  of 
candid  and  impartial  examination  into  the  claims  of 

'  Ammianus  Marcel linus,  xxii.   5,  says  of  Julian,   "  Nullas  infestas 
hominibus  bestias,  utbunt  sibiferales  plerique  Christianorum,  experlus." 


Julian'' s  intellectual  gifts  aiid  attainments.  151 

the  two  rival  religions  ;  it  could  not  be  alleged  that 
Julian  was  unfitted  by  intellectual  disqualifications 
to  examine  their  rival  pretensions  and  to  pronounce 
a  fair  verdict  upon  them,  or  to  be  swayed  by  sensual 
passions  to  prefer  Heathenism  to  Christianity.  Ju- 
lian was  richly  gifted  with  mental  endowments,  which 
had  been  improved  by  a  liberal  education.  He  had 
studied  in  the  schools  of  Constantinople,  Nicomedia, 
and  Athens  ;  and  was  a  pupil  of  the  famous  rhetori- 
cian Libanius,  whose  lectures  he  eagerly  read,  when 
prevented  from  personal  attendance  at  them;  and 
was  a  friend  of  the  celebrated  Themistius.  He  had 
been  a  fellow-pupil  at  Athens  with  some  of  the  most 
distinguished  Christian  writers  of  the  age,  Basil  and 
Gregory  Nazianzen  ;  and  was  familiar  with  the  best 
Greek  and  Roman  Authors,  especially  their  Poets 
and  Philosophers.  Under  the  training  of  the  cele- 
brated Platonist  Nicocles,  he  had  learnt  to  see  in 
Homer  allegorical  shadowings  of  the  noblest  truths 
and  of  the  deepest  mysteries  of  Ethics  and  Religion.^ 
He  was  deeply  imbued  with  the  lore  of  the  newer 
Platonic  school  by  vEdesius,  Chrysanthius,  and  espe- 
cially by  Maximus.  His  own  writings,  composed  in 
the  Greek  language,  challenged  comparison,  in  matter 
and  style,  with  the  most  popular  specimens  of  con- 
temporary heathen  Literature."^  He  employed  his 
intellectual  powers  in  an  endeavour  to  disprove  Chris- 
tianity, in  an  elaborate  work  ^  of  three  books,  and  to 
show  that  he  had  rejected   it  on  good  grounds.     He 

'^  Libanius  ad  Julian,  i.  p.  459.  More  will  be  said  on  this  work  below. 

^  His  work  against  Christianity  was  preferred  by  Libanius  to  that  of 
Porphyry.    Soar.  iii.  23. 

*  This  work  of  Julian  was  regarded  as  of  so  much  importance  by  the 
Christian  Church,  that  some  time  after  its  author's  death  S.  Cyril  of 
Alexandria  undertook  to  refute  it. 


152  Julianas  studies,  wi-'itings,  moral  charactei'. 

availed  himself  of  the  previous  infidel  writings  of 
Celsus,  Hierocles,  and  Porphyry,^  and  he  had  more 
knowledge  of  the  Gospels,  which  he  attempted  to  re- 
fute, from  his  own  previous  position  as  a  Reader  of 
them  in  the  public  ministry  of  the  Church. 

In  the  exercise  of  some  moral  virtues,  Julian  was 
also  far  superior  to  most  of  his  predecessors.  It  is 
evident,  from  the  dramatic  portrait  gallery  ^ — in  which 
he  imitates  the  style  of  Lucian  and  makes  his  pre- 
decessors the  Caesars  to  pass  in  review  before  Jupiter 
at  the  feast  of  Saturnalia — that  the  Stoic  Philoso- 
pher, Marcus  Aurelius,  whose  motto  in  that  book  is 
**  Imitate  the  gods,"  was  his  favourite  and  model,"^  not 
merely  among  the  Emperors,  but  among  all  the 
heroes  of  ancient  history  ;  and  was  superior,  in 
his  estimation,  to  Alexander,  Caesar,  and  above  all 
to  his  own  uncle  Constantine,  who  is  the  special  ob- 
ject of  his  aversion  and  sarcasm.  Julian  was  free 
from  parsimony  and  avarice,  liberal  in  giving,  diligent 
and  industrious  in  the  transaction  of  state  affairs,  a 
brave  soldier,  and  successful  in  all  but  his  last  and 
fatal  campaign  in  Persia,  where  he  exposed  himself 
recklessly  ^  in  the  field.  He  was  dreaded  by  Gauls 
and  Germans,  whom  he  conquered  when  Csesar  in  the 
West  and  Viceroy  of  Constantius,  and  was  admired 
and  beloved  by  his  Army.  The  historian  Ammianus 
Marcellinus,^  who  served  under  him,  bears  testimony 
to  his   military  prowess  and  martial  virtues,  and  to 


5  See  above,  vol.  i.  pp.  114,  366—370,  373. 

6  Entitled  *' TheCoesars,"  which  Gibbon  (ch.xxiv.  p.  130)  calls  "one 
of  the  most  agreeable  and  instructive  productions  of  ancient  wit." 

'  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xvi.  i. 

*  Oblitus  loricK,"  says  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxv.  3. 
9  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxv.  4,  "  Vir  profecto  heroicis  commemorandus 
infreniis,"  &c. 


Julian's  cJiaractet'  and  habits :  love  of  Paganism  :  and    153 

devotioji  to  it. 
his  fortitude,  temperance,  sobriety,  and  chastity.  He 
shunned  the  Hcentious  and  barbarous  spectacles  of 
the  Theatre  and  the  Arena  ;  he  was  sparing  in  his 
diet  and  sleep,  of  which  he  abridged  himself  for  study  ; 
patient  alike  of  heat  and  cold,  a  pattern  to  his  troops 
in  marches  and  in  the  field,  an  example  of  stoical 
sternness  and  austerity  ;  a  Diogenes,  with  the  long 
beard  of  a  cynic,  clothed  in  the  sagum  of  a  military 
commander.  He  differed  also  from  many  of  his 
heathen  predecessors  in  another  important  respect. 
Nero,  Domitian,  Decius,  Valerian,  Diocletian,  per- 
secuted the  Church  not  because  they  loved  heathenism, 
but  because  they  hated  Christianity.  But  Julian  was 
passionately  enamoured  of  Paganism  ;  he  was  a 
zealous  enthusiast,  a  devoted  ^  admirer  of  it.  In  his 
early  life  at  Athens,  the  flourishing  school  of  heathen 
Literature,  the  pagan  priests,  hierophants,  rhetoricians, 
and  sophists  had  combined  to  stimulate  his  zeal  for 
Heathenism  ;  Pagan  young  men  were  his  associates 
there,  who  joined  together  in  inspiring  him  with  the 
belief  that  he  was  born  to  restore  it  to  its  ancient 
glory.  He  openly  preferred  his  title  of  "Pontifex 
Maximus  "  to  that  of  Augustus.^  He  was  not  con- 
tent with  the  public  ritual  of  the  heathen  temples 
which  he  restored  ;  he  had  a  temple  in  his  own  gar- 
den, and  a  chapel  in  his  palace,  in  which  he  was 
constant  at  his  devotions  morning  and  evening.  He 
identified  himself  with  Paganism  by  officiating  as  a 
priest  at  its  sacrifices,  splitting  the  wood,  kindling 
the  fire  of  the  altar,  and  fanning  the  flame  with  his 

breath,  and  slaying  the  victims  with  his  own  hands.^ 

1  "  Superstitiosus  magis  quam  sacrorum  legitimus  obsen'ator, "  says 
Ammianus,  ibid. 

2  Liban.  Orat.  viii.  p.  245,  de  Juliani  nece. 

'  "  Innumeras  sine  parsimonia  pecudes  mactans,"  says  Marcellinus 


154       His  devotional  viysticisni  ;  personal  appearance. 

He  regarded  Heathenism  with  mysterious  awe,  and 
chanted  its  praises  with  enthusiastic  rhapsodies  in 
rapturous  ecstasies,  caught  from  the  hymns  of  pagan 
mystics  of  the  new  Platonic  School,  Plotinus  and 
lamblichus,  and  from  the  venerable  traditions  of 
heathen  poets.  Homer,  Orpheus,  and  Pindar,  and  the 
Greek  Dramatists,  and  from  initiation  in  sacred 
mysteries,  and  from  nocturnal  communings  with  the 
unseen  world,  and  from  diving  into  the  deepest  re- 
cesses of  magic,  with  all  the  fervour  of  a  modern 
spiritualist ;  and  from  astrology,  necromancy,  and 
sorcery,  in  company  with  his  friend  Maximus  ;  ^  and 
from  the  terrible  orgies  of  the  Taurobolia,^  reeking 
with  bulls'  blood,  with  which,  being  poured  over 
his  head,  he  drenched  and  washed  away  from  his 
brow  the  last  traces  of  Christian  Baptism. 

The  portrait  drawn  by  Gregory  Nazlanzen  ^ 
of  Julian's  personal  appearance  and  demeanour 
when  at  Athens,  seems  to  intimate  a  physical 
temperament  specially  susceptible  of  impressions 
from  such  phenomena  as  would  act  upon  him  in 
Eleusinian  and  other  mysteries,  or  in  heathen 
oracles  and  magical  arts.  The  ill-set  neck,  the  con- 
vulsive movements  of  the  shoulders,  eyes,  and  feet, 
the  wild  stare,  the  noddings  of  the  head  and 
twitchings  of  the  features  and  sarcastic  nose,  the 
sudden  bursts  of  immoderate  laughter  and  rapid 
succession  of  abrupt  irrelevant  questions,  may  perhaps 

(xxv.  4),  "  ut  cestimaretur,  si  revertisset  de  Parthis,  boves  jam 
defuturos." 

4  Eunap.  Vit.  Sophist.  Maximi,  p.  494. 

^  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  iv.  52 — 56.  By  this  initiatoiy  ceremony  of  a 
bath  of  blood,  the  votaries  of  Mithras  and  Cybele  sought  to  gain  for 
themselves  admission  to  the  joys  of  immortality. 

6  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  v.  23,  p.  161.     Cp.  Socr.  iii.  23. 


Julian'' s  vieiu  of  his  own  imperial  mission.  155 

have  been  symptoms  of  epileptic  tendencies,  which 
would  lend  themselves  easily  to  the  influences  of 
necromantic  sorceries  and  spiritualistic  illusions. 

It  cannot  be  doubted  that  Julian  was  as  much  in 
earnest  in  favour  of  Heathenism  as  Constantine  had 
ever  been  for  Christianity.  He  was,  as  has  been  said, 
prejudiced  against  Christianity  by  the  sins  of  Chris- 
tians, especially  of  Christian  Bishops,  and  by  the 
cruelty  of  Christian  Emperors,  Constantine  and  Con- 
stantius  to  his  own  family  and  theirs.  He  felt  a 
strong  persuasion  that  he  was  raised  up  by  the  gods, 
whom  he  devoutly  worshipped,  to  vindicate  their 
outraged  dignity,  and  to  reopen  their  temples,  and 
restore  their  altars  and  sacrifices,  and  to  bring  back 
the  national  creed  and  ancestral  religion  which  in  his 
view  had  made  Rome  the  mistress  of  the  world  ;  and 
that  he  had  been  providentially  preserved  by  heaven 
from  the  murderous  hands  of  the  sons  of  Constantine, 
and  had  been  exalted  by  the  miraculous  intervention 
of  the  gods  to  the  highest  pinnacle  of  earthly  glory 
and  imperial  power,  for  the  special  purpose  of  extir- 
pating a  novel  and  upstart  creed,  the  degrading 
Galilaean  superstition  (for  such,  in  his  eyes,  Chris- 
tianity was),  and  for  restoring  the  ancient  faith  and 
worship,  which  were  identified  in  his  mind  with  what- 
ever was  most  profound  in  Philosophy,  most  beau- 
tiful in  Poetry  and  Art,  most  noble  in  martial  enter- 
prise, most  wise  in  State  policy,  most  magnanimous 
in  Patriotism,  most  profitable  to  human  Society,  and 
most  pleasing  to  the  heavenly  Makers  and  Rulers  of 
the  World. 

Nor  was  this  all.  We  need  not  hesitate  to  say  that 
Julian  was  helped  by  the  supernatural  agency  of 
spiritual    Powers    in    this    bold    enterprise.      If  we 


156  Julian  helped  by  the  Powers  of  darkness. 

believe  that  Christianity  is  the  kingdom  of  light,  and 
that  Heathenism  is  the  realm  of  darkness ;  if  we 
give  credence  to  our  Lord's  promise  that  the  Gates 
of  Hell  shall  not  prevail  against  His  Church "  (which 
implies  that  they  will  attempt  to  do  so);  if  we  accept 
St.  Paul's  saying  that  what  the  heathen  offered  at 
their  altars,  they  sacrificed  to  devils  and  not  to  God,^ 
we  must  suppose  that  the  Powers  of  Darkness  would 
be  stirred  by  new  hopes  at  Julian's  accession, 
and  would  be  ready  to  ally  themselves  with  the 
Emperor  of  the  world  in  prosecuting  his  magnificent 
work — that  of  their  own  restoration  and  aggrandize- 
ment. The  opportunity  also  was  favourable,  above 
all  hope.  The  prospect  of  victory  was  cheering 
beyond  all  precedent. 

They  were,  in  fact,  permitted  by  God  to  show  their 
readiness  to  co-operate  with  Julian.  The  story 
related  by  Eunapius^  the  Sophist  in  his  life  of 
Maximus  of  Ephesus,  who  united  the  character  of  a 
Platonic  Philosopher  with  that  of  a  Professor  of 
Magic,  and  the  narrative  of  his  theurgic  practices  in 
the  temple  of  Hecate,  and  of  the  influence  which 
he  exercised  upon  Julian,  lead  us  to  believe  that  he 
was  no  unwilling  partaker  in  such  mysterious  cere- 
monies. When  Julian  was  engaged  in  one  of  his 
oracular  consultations,  in  the  dark  inner  shrine  of  a 
heathen  temple,  and  when  all  the  mysterious  ritual 
had  been  duly  performed  by  the  hierophant  to  conjure 
up  the  spirits  of  the  place,  Julian  was  alarmed  by  the 
strange  sounds  which  he  heard,  and  by  spectral  forms 
and  frightful  apparitions  which  he  saw ;  and  with 
an  involuntary  act  of  dread,  he  shuddered  and  shrank 

'  Matt.  xvi.  18.  8  I  Cor.  x.  20. 

'  Vita  Maximi,  pp.  48—51. 


Julian  at  Antioch — belief  in  oracles  and  divination,    157 

backward,  and  made  the  sign  of  the  cross,  at  which 
they  vanished  ;  and  when  he  asked  the  reason  of  this, 
the  reply  of  the  thaumaturge  was,  "  Do  not  imagine 
that  they  were  scared  away  by  the  cross  ;  no,  they 
fled  in  impious  execration  at  such  a  profane  act  as 
thine."  1 

It  is  reported  on  good  authority,  that  when,  in 
July,  362,  he  had  opened  the  prophetic  spring  at 
Daphne,  in  the  suburb  of  the  Syrian  Antioch,  and 
had  questioned  Apollo,  the  deity  of  the  famous 
temple,  why  he  had  been  long  silent,  and  why  his 
worship  had  been  neglected,  the  answer  was,  that 
he  had  been  hindered  by  the  presence  of  corpses 
brought  into  the  sacred  precincts.  Julian  inferred 
that  Apollo  complained  of  the  proximity  of  the  body 
of  the  Martyr  S.  Babylas,  Bishop  of  Antioch  in  the 
time  of  Decius,  which  had  been  brought  there  by 
Julian's  own  brother  Gallus,  eleven  years  before.  He 
therefore  commanded  the  Christians  to  clear  away  the 
Martyr's  remains,  which  they  did  with  joy  and  hymns 
cf  praise.  Soon  afterwards  the  temple  itself  was  con- 
sumed by  fire.^ 

Julian  had  been  encouraged  by  auguries  and  oracles, 
when  he  was  in  Gaul,  to  believe  that  he  was  called  to 
the  Empire  ;  and  at  a  time  when  Constantius  was  in 
good  health,  he  had  learnt  from  divination  (says  the 
heathen  historian^)  and  from  dreams,  that  the 
Emperor's  end  was  near.  This  presage  was  soon 
fulfilled,  and  it  confirmed  his  belief  in  spiritual  revela- 

1  Theodoret,  iii.  i.     Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  iv.  55. 

2  Sozom.  V.  19,  20.  Theodoret,  iii.  6.  Chrysostom  in  S.  Babyl. 
Socr.  iii.  18.     Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxii.  13.     Julian,  Misopog.  p.  361. 

3  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxi.  i,  "  Conjiciens  Constantium  per  vatici- 
nandi  prsesagia  multa  (quae  callebat)  et  somnia  e  vita  protinus 
excessurum." 


158     Julian's  policy  for  the  ovei  throw  of  Christianity. 

tions,  and  made  him  more  ready  to  be  led  by 
them. 

He  was  permitted  to  hold  communion  with  the 
Powers  of  evil,  which  were  allowed  to  work  together 
with  him,  and  to  concentrate  their  energies  with  in- 
tense violence  and  consummate  virulence  in  this  their 
death-struggle  with  Christianity.  This  was  subservient 
to  wise  purposes,  that,  by  the  overthrow  of  the  Enemy 
of  the  Church,  when  he  seemed  most  hkely  to  triumph 
over  it,  the  glory  of  God  might  be  advanced,  and  the 
hearts  of  the  faithful  be  comforted  by  the  confirmation 
of  the  truth  of  Christianity,  when  most  in  peril  of 
being  crushed.* 

The  manner  also  in  which  Julian  proceeded  favours 
this  opinion.  He  combined  in  a  marvellous  way  the 
two  characteristics  of  the  Evil  One — the  subtilty  of 
the  serpent  with  the  ruthlessness  of  the  lion. 

At  first,  like  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  he  attempted 
to  "enter  peaceably,^' ^  and  to  corrupt  by  flatteries. 
He  encouraged  all  who  would  imitate  him  by 
renouncing  Christianity  for  paganism,  especially  his 
soldiers  ^  and  courtiers.     He  did  not  wish  to  ennoble 

'*  Bishop  Warburton  (who  was  no  enthusiast)  does  not  scruple  to  say 
(in  his  "Julian,"  chap,  ii.)  that  "  this  extraordinary  man  was  raised  up 
to  do  the  last  honours  to  the  religion  of  Jesus;  to  show  to  the  world  what 
human  power,  with  all  its  advantages  united,  was  able  to  oppose  to  its 
establishment ;  for  we  find  in  this  Emperor  all  the  great  qualities  that 
an  adversary  could  require  to  secure  success  to  so  daring  an  opposition." 

5  Dan.  xi.  22,  32.  An  interesting  and  instructive  parallel  might  be 
traced  between  Julian  and  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (whom  all  the 
Christian  Fathers  regarded  as  a  type  of  Antichrist),  which  would  well 
repay  the  pains  of  a  Christian  Plutarch.  Both  warred  against  God  in 
His  temple  at  Jerusalem  ;  both  exposed  themselves  publicly  in  strange 
buffoonery  at  Antioch  ;  both  suddenly  found  death  in  a  military  expe- 
dition to  Persia,  where  they  had  looked  for  victory.  As  to  Antiochus, 
may  I  be  permitted  to  refer  to  the  notes  in  my  commentary  on  Daniel 
viii.  9,  25  ;  i  Mace.  vi.  8 — 13  ;  2  Mace.  ix.  2 — 18  ? 

6  Julian,  Epist.  38.    Theodoret,  iii.  2. 


Policy  of  Toleration — Recall  of  Bishops :  Edicts  against    159 

Christian  Teacliei's. 
Christianity  by  Martyrdoms.  He  professed  to  en- 
courage liberty  of  conscience  and  universal  Toleration. 
The  Bishops  who  had  been  exiled  by  his  predecessor 
Constantius  were  allowed  to  return  to  their  homes. 
He  seemed  a  patron  of  Christianity.  But  in  this 
there  was  an  artful  design.  He  desired  either  to 
promote  religious  indifference  among  Christians  by 
encouraging  all  sects  alike,  or  (as  the  heathen  his- 
torian expresses  it^)by  bringing  rival  sectaries  into 
violent  collision  with  one  another,  to  expose  them  to 
the  derision  of  the  heathen,  and  to  give  a  triumph  to 
Paganism,  and  to  rend  asunder  the  Church  by 
schism. 

In  this  policy  of  Toleration  also  he  took  care  ^  to 
give  a  preference  to  schismatics  and  heretics.  He 
showed  a  particular  favour  to  the  Novatians  and 
Donatists  of  Africa,^  and  wrote  a  flattering  letter  to 
the  Arian  Bishop  Aetius,^  and  congratulated  the 
Bishop  Photinus  on  his  superior  liberality  and 
enlightenment  in  denying  the  divinity  of  Christ. 

Having  done  this,  he  then  unmasked  his  intentions 
by  other  less  tolerant  acts.  He  issued  two  Edicts,  in 
one  of  which"  he  asserts  it  to  be  monstrous  that  persons 
who  instruct  others  in  the  writings  of  heathen  authors, 
s?iould  dishonour  the  gods  of  heathenism.  *' I  do  not 
wish  men  to  change  their  religion  ;  but  I  allow  them 
free  choice,  either  not  to  teach,  or  to  teach  no  impiety 
concerning  the  gods.     If  teachers  think  those  authors 

"  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxii.  5. 

^  Socr.  iii.  1 1. 

9  Optat.  lib.  ii,     Aug.  Epist.  105.     Cod.  Theodos.  xvi.  tit.  v. 

*  Sozom.  V.  5.  Julian,  Epist.  31,  p.  404,  ed.  Spanheim,  1696.  In 
this  letter  he  speaks  of  the  "  madness  of  the  Galilasans  "  to  a  Christian 
Bishop. 

2  Epist.  42. 


i6o        Edicts  of  Julian — Persecutions  of  Christianity — 

Martyrdoms. 
in  error,  let  them  go  to  the  Churches  of  the  Gahlaeans, 
and  expound  Matthew  and  Luke,  who  forbid  our 
sacrifices.  I  wish  however  that  the  ears  and  tongues 
of  you  Christians  may  be  '  regenerated,'  as  you  would 
say,  by  those  writings  which  you  value  so  much. 
We  do  not  however  forbid  (Christian)  children  to  go 
to  school." 

But  practically  he  did  so.  Because  in  his  edict  on 
Professors,  June  ij,  "^62,  he  allowed  no  one  to  teach 
who  had  not  a  municipal  diploma  countersigned  by 
the  Emperor  himself;  and  as  all  Grammar  Schools 
were  to  be  seminaries  of  Paganism,  therefore  no 
Christian  Parent  could  send  his  child  to  them.^ 

He  thus  hoped  to  induce  Christian  Teachers  to 
renounce  their  Christianity  for  the  sake  of  temporal 
gain  and  professional  advancement,  or  to  reduce 
Christians  to  ignorance  and  barbarism,  and  to  disable 
them  from  doing  what  had  been  done  by  Christian 
Apologists,  such  as  Clement  of  Alexandria,  who 
exposed  the  vices  and  follies  of  heathenism  by 
reference  to  its  own  Poets  and  Philosophers. 

Besides,  although  Julian  refrained  from  violent  acts 
of  persecution  of  Christianity  in  his  own  person,  yet 
he  connived  at  persecution  by  the  heathen  and  Jewish 
population  of  the  Empire,  and  excited  them  to  assaults 
on  the  Church  by  impunity.^  Consequently  we  read 
of  a  large  number  of  Christian  Martyrs  in  various 
countries,    in    Palestine,    Phoenicia,  Galatia,   Phrygia, 

3  The  first  of  these  edicts  is  condemned  even  by  the  heathen 
historian  Ammianus  MarcelHnus,  xxii.  lO  ;  xxv.  4.  Cp.  Greg.  Naz. 
Orat.  iv.  §  102,  pp.  79,  80,  131  ;  Socr.  ill.  16  ;  Theodoret,  iii,  4; 
Aug.  de  Civ.  Dei,  xviii.  52 ;  Neander,  iii.  76.  Gibbon  says,  ch.  xxiii. 
p.  112,  "  The  edict  of  Julian  appears  to  have  included  the  physicians  and 
professors  of  all  liberal  arts." 

4  Theodoret,  iii.  3.     Ambrose,  Epist.  40.     Tillemont,  vol.  vii.  art.  ix. 


Julianas  professions  of  Toleration — Allurements  to  idolatry  1 6 1 

— pauperizatioji  of  Clergy. 
Cappadocia,  Thrace,  Italy,  Egypt,  in  the  short  reign 
of  Julian.      His    inconsistency  in    this    respect  was 
signally  exemplified  in  his  treatment  of  Athanasius, 
as  we  shall  see  hereafter. 

In  fact,  the  profession  of  Toleration  of  Christianity 
on  his  part,  coupled  with  toleration  of  Persecution  of 
it  by  others,  was  merely  a  heartless  mockery,  and  was 
more  cruel  in  its  results  >than  direct  persecution  by  the 
imperial  power.  In  the  latter  case,  persecution  was 
regulated,  as  in  Trajan's  reign,  and  was  restrained  by 
law^;  but  under  Julian,  who  disclaimed  persecution, 
and  professed  zeal  for  liberty  of  conscience,  free  range 
was  given  to  the  unbridled  passions  of  an  infuriated 
populace  to  wreak  their  wrath  on  Christianity. 

In  order  also  to  entrap  Christians  into  idolatry, 
he  resorted  to  the  unworthy  artifice  of  causing  his 
imperial  statues  to  be  so  intimately  combined  with 
images  of  the  gods,  that  whoever  paid  homage  to  the 
one,  as  all  were  required  to  do,  could  not  be  under- 
stood to  do  otherwise  than  adore  the  other ;  ®  and 
when  he  distributed  donations  to  his  soldiers,  he 
required  them  to  cast  incense  into  a  censer,  as  a  pre- 
requisite for  receiving  his  bounty.^ 

He  also  attempted  to  weaken  Christianity  by 
pauperizing  its  ministers.  He  deprived  them  and 
their  Churches  of  their  endowments  and  franchises, 
with  which  they  had  been  enriched  and  honoured  by 
Christian  Emperors ;  and  he  transferred  them  to 
heathen  priests  and  temples.  And  he  did  this  with 
an  ironical  sneer,  which  added  bitterness  to  the  penal 
infliction,  by  telling  them  that  he  gave  them  an  oppor- 
tunity of  practising  in  their  own  persons  those  holy 

5  See  above,  vol.  i.  pp.  122—124.  *  Sozom.  v.  17. 

7  Ibid. 
VOL.   II.  M 


1 62  Julianas  attempts  to  popularize  and  moralize  Paganism, 

lessons  of  patience  and  contentment  under  suffering 
and  privations,  which  the  Founder  of  their  rehgion 
had  commissioned  them  to  teach. 

While  he  thus  endeavoured  to  undermine  Chris- 
tianity, he  showed  consummate  address  in  his  endea- 
vours to  popularize  Paganism.  He  not  only  restored 
the  temples,  and  assigned  to  them  rich  revenues,  but 
he  endeavoured  to  render  their  religious  services  more 
attractive  by  festal  decorations  and  beautiful  music, 
especially  of  pagan  hymnology.  He  elevated  the 
dignity  of  the  Priesthood  by  fresh  immunities  and 
privileges  ;  and  he  endeavoured  to  raise  its  moral  tone 
by  precept  and  example,  by  the  study  of  ethical 
Philosophy,  and  by  the  exercise  of  moral  virtues  ;  in 
a  word,  to  Christianize  heathenism  ^  in  social  respects. 
And  thus  he  unconsciously  paid  the  highest  tribute 
to  Christianity. 

The  "  Galilaeans  "  (as  he  called  the  Christians)  were 
proposed  by  him  as  an  example  for  the  imitation 
of  heathen  Priests,^  in  the  building  of  asylums,  in  the 
care  of  the  sick  and  needy,  in  burying  the  dead,  and 
holiness  of  life,  and  in  the  erection  of  schools  and 
monasteries. 

"  We  must  attend  to  these  works  of  philanthropy  " 
(he  wrote  ^  to  Arsacius,  Pontiff  of  Galatia),  "because 
while  our  poor  are  neglected  by  their  own  priests,  and 
relieved  by  those  of  the  Galilaeans,  our  religion  loses 
the  credit  which  theirs  gains.  We  must  therefore 
build  receptacles  for  strangers  in  every  city  ;  for  it  is  a 
base  thing  that  these  Galila^ans  should  support  our 

8  See  Julian,  Frag.  Epist.  28S— 299 ;  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  iv.  §  iii. 
pp.  138,  139. 

9  Julian,  Epist.  xlix.  ad  Arsacium  Pontificem,  p.  429.     Sozom.  v.  16. 
1  Ibid. 


Julian's  attempts  against  Christianity  overruled  for  its  163 
benefit. 
poor  as  well  as  their  own,  while  we  suffer  them  to 
perish."  He  therefore  made  an  imperial  order  that 
a  large  annual  public  grant  should  be  made  for  these 
purposes.  The  Christian  Teachers,  he  said,  had 
wounded  Heathenism  by  arrows  plumed  with  feathers 
from  its  wings,^  and  he  had  therefore  prohibited 
them  from  instructing  their  scholars  in  heathen 
literature  ;  he  also  tried  to  wound  Christianity  by 
borrowing  its  virtues,  and  by  enlisting  them  in  the 
service  of  Heathenism. 

But  under  the  controlling  power  of  divine  provi- 
dence these  designs  were  overruled  for  good.  While 
some  were  beguiled  by  his  flatteries  to  fall  away  from 
the  faith,  noble  examples  were  displayed  of  heroism 
and  self-sacrifice  among  the  soldiers  and  courtiers  of 
Julian.  They  were  winnowed  by  persecution.  The 
chaff  flew  off  from  the  threshing-floor  of  the  Church, 
but  the  good  grain  remained,  and  was  made  more 
visible.^  Jovian,  Valentinian,  and  Valens— afterwards 
Emperors  * — stood  firm  among  his  troops.  Romanus 
and  other  soldiers  of  Julian,  having  been  betrayed 
unwillingly  to  take  part  in  an  idolatrous  ceremony, 
rose  up  in  indignation,  and  protested  loudly  against 
it,  and  asked  to  be  cleansed  by  the  fire  of  martyrdom 
from  the  stain  of  apostasy.^ 

The  power  and  love  of  Christ  was  thus  also  signally 
displayed.  Theodosius,  a  young  Christian  at  Antioch, 
was  arrested  among  others  on  a  charge  of  singing 
hymns  and  psalms  reproachful  of  the  Emperor's 
religion.  He  was  put  to  the  rack,  and  so  severe  was 
the  torture  that  it  was  thought  he  could   not  recover 

2  Theodoret,  iii.  4-     Socr.  iii.  12.  ^  Socr.  iii.  22. 

4  Theodoret,  iii.  12.     Aug.  de  Civ.  Dei,  xvi.  22.     Socr.  iii.  13. 
^  Theodoret, iii.  13.     Sozom,  v.  17. 
M    2 


164  Noble  Examples  of  Christian  Confessors — Cccsaiius — • 

Vict  or  inns. 
from  its  effects.  But  he  survived;  and  some  time 
afterwards,  when  Rufinus  the  historian  asked  him 
whether  he  suffered  much  pain  during  the  torture, 
"No" — he  rephed — "very  Httle  ;  for  a  young  Man 
stood  by  me,  who  wiped  off  the  sweat  from  my  body 
when  it  was  on  the  rack,  and  also  comforted  and 
cheered  me,  and  made  the  time  of  my  torture  to  be 
one  not  of  agony,  but  of  joy."  ^ 

Juhan's  attempts  to  proselytize  also  elicited  noble 
avowals,  and  produced  generous  sacrifices.  Csesarius, 
the  brother  of  Gregory  Nazianzen,  the  favourite 
physician  of  the  Emperor,  resisted  his  solicitations,^ 
and  renounced  his  high  ofhce  at  court,  and  retired  to 
his  own  country.  It  is  superfluous  to  mention  that 
Julian's  former  fellow-students^  S.  Basil  and  his  friend 
S.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  the  brother  of  Csesarius,  would 
have  rejected  the  Emperor's  overtures  if  they  had 
been  made,  and  would  have  dissuaded  others  from 
doing  so.^  Many  Christian  teachers  of  Literature, 
such  as  Prohaereslus  ^  the  Sophist,  of  Athens,  resigned 
their  professorial  chairs  rather  than  renounce  their 
faith. 

The  story  of  Fabius  Marius  Victorinus/the  celebrated 
Teacher  of  philosophy  and  rhetoric  at  Rome,  is  very 
remarkable.  It  afterwards  bore  fruit  in  the  con- 
version of  S.  Augustine,  and  may  be  described  in  his 
words.^     He  relates  it  from  the  mouth  of  Simplician, 

6  Rufin.  i.  35,  36.  Socr.  iii.  19.  Ruinart,  Acta  Martyrum,  p.  604. 
This  may  be  added  to  similar  instances  quoted  above  in  vol.  i.  p.  383. 

7  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  vii.  §  12 — §  14,  p.  206,  ed.  Bened.  Paris,  1778. 

8  The  letters  of  Julian  to  Basil,  if  genuine,  were  not  addressed  to 
Basil  "the  Great,"  but  to  some  other  person  bearing  that  name.  See 
Vita  Basilii,  ed.  Bened.  vol.  iii.  p.  Ix.  Paris,  1730. 

9  S.Jerome,  Chron.    Eunapius,  c.  8.     Tillemont,  vii.  719. 
1  Augustine,  Confession  viii.  2. 


History  of  the  conversion  of  Vidorimis  as  relatd  by  165 
S.  Augustine. 
the  instructor  and  successor  of  S.  Ambrose  In  the 
Episcopal    See   of  Milan.     "  Simplician  had  known 
Victorinus  at  Rome  ;  and  he  told  me,"  says  Augustuie, 
"  what  I  will  now  relate.     For,  O  God,  it  redounds  to 
the  glory  of  Thy  grace,  that  Victorinus— that  most 
learned  old  man,  consummately  skilled  in  all  liberal 
learning,  and  one  who  had  studied,  weighed,  and  ex- 
plained so  many  systems  of  Philosophy,  and  had  been 
the  teacher  of  so  many  noble  Senators,  and  who,  on 
account   of  his  merits    in  these   respects,   had   been 
honoured  with  a  statue  in  the  Roman   Forum,  and 
who  even  till  his  old  age  had  been   a  worshipper  of 
idols    and   a   champion   of  their   religion— was    not 
ashamed  to  become  a  little  child  of  Thy  Christ,  and 
to  be  an  infant  at  Thy  baptismal  font,  and  to  bow 
meekly  his  neck  beneath  the  yoke  of  humility,  and 
to  submit  his  forehead  to  the  scandal  of  the  Cross. 
O  Lord,  O  Lord,  Thou,  Who  didst  'bow  the  heavens 
and  come  down,  and  didst  touch  the  mountains  and 
they  did  smoke  '  (Ps.  cxliv.  5),  tell  me  how  Thou  didst 
win  Thy  way  into  that  heart  of  his  ?     He  used  to  read 
the   Holy  Scriptures,  and   he  carefully  studied  and 
thoroughly    examined    all    Christian    learning,   and 
said  to  Simplician,  not  openly,  but  in  the  secrecy  of 
friendship,  '  I  am  now  a  Christian.'    '  I  will  not  believe 
it,'  was  Simplician^s  reply,  '  nor  shall  I   count  you  a 
Christian    till  I    see  you   in  the    Church.'     'What!' 
he  answered,  smiling,  'do  Walls  make  Christians.?' 
This  repartee  was  often  repeated.     For  he  feared  to 
offend    his    proud    heathen    friends,   who    were   like 
'cedars    of   Libanus  which   the   Lord   had    not   yet 
broken '  (Ps.  xxv.  5),  and  from  whose  haughty  tops 
he  well  knew  that  blasts  of  wrath  would  dash  down 
upon  his  head.     But  by  dint  of  reading  and  poring 


1 66  Public  confession  of  Victor inus. 

over  God's  Word  he  drank  in  strength,  and  feared  that 
he  himself  would  be  denied  by  Christ  in  the  presence 
of  His  angels  if  he  feared  to  confess  Him  in  the  pre- 
sence of  men  ;  and  he  deemed  that  he  himself  would 
be  guilty  of  a  heinous  sin  if  he  were  ashamed  of  the 
Sacraments  of  Christ,  whereas  he  had  not  been 
ashamed  of  the  sacrifices  of  devils  ;  and  he  ceased  to 
fear  shame  from  what  is  false,  and  began  to  fear 
shame  from  what  is  true. 

^'  *  Let  us  go  to  the  Church,'  he  said  ;  '  I  wish  to 
become  a  Christian.'  Simplician  was  transported 
with  joy,  and  went  with  him.  Plaving  there  received 
the  requisite  instruction,  he  gave  in  his  name  as  a 
candidate  for  regeneration  by  baptism,  to  the  wonder 
of  Rome,  and  to  the  joy  of  the  Church.  Proud  men 
looked  on,  and  gnashed  their  teeth  in  rage  ;  but  Thy 
servant,  O  Lord,  placed  his  trust  in  Thee,  and  regarded 
not  lying  vanities.  The  hour  arrived  when  he  was 
to  make  profession  of  his  faith,  according  to  cus- 
tom, on  a  lofty  place  in  the  church  in  the  sight  of 
the  faithful,  and  in  a  form  of  words  prescribed  to 
those  who  are  about  to  be  admitted  to  Thy  grace, 
and  committed  to  memory.  An  offer  was  made  him  by 
the  presbyters,  such  as  was  usually  tendered  to  some 
who  were  likely  to  tremble  from  bashfulness — that  he 
should  make  his  profession  in  private  ;  but  he  refused 
to  do  so,  and  preferred  to  declare  his  hope  of  salvation 
in  the  presence  of  the  multitude.  For  he  had  made 
public  profession  of  rhetoric,  and  had  found  no  salva- 
tion there.  He  therefore  mounted  the  high  place  to 
proclaim  his  faith  ;  and  all  the  faithful  who  knev/ 
him  shouted  forth  his  name  with  a  burst  of  joy, 
'  Victorinus !  Victorinus ! '  Then  at  once  all  were 
silent  to  hear  his  words.     He  pronounced  the  pro- 


Chi'istian  poetry  a  result  of  persecution.    Julian's    167 
writings  against  the  Faith. 

fession  of  the  true  faith  with  noble  courage;  and  all 

who   heard  his  voice  embraced  him  in    their   hearts 

with  love  and  delight." 

Another  advantage  thence  accrued  to  the  Church 
from  Julian's  oppression  of  it.  Able  Christian  writers, 
observing  that  Christian  children  were  debarred  from 
the  study  of  heathen  poets,  devoted  themselves  to 
the  composition  of  Christian  poetry.  The  Church 
owed  to  Julian  some  of  the  sacred  Poems  of  the  elder 
and  younger  Apollinaris/  and  of  Gregory  Nazianzen.* 

The  writings  also  of  Julian  himself,  which  were  de- 
signed to  subvert  Christianity,  did  in  fact  tend  to 
strengthen  it.  The  homage  which,  in  his  letters  to 
heathen  priests  and  philosophers,  he  rendered  to  the 
virtues  of  the  Galilaeans — their  works  of  mercy  and 
charity,  their  institutions  of  philanthropy  and  bene- 
ficence— tended  to  make  them  admired  where  other- 
wise they  would  not  have  been  known.  Thus  he 
became  against  his  will  an  Apologist  for  Christianity.* 

Julian  endeavoured  to  refute  Christianity,  with 
which  he  was  better  acquainted  than  most  infidel 
writers.  In  the  winter  of  A.D.  362,  when  he  was  at 
Antioch,  in  company  with  the  Sophist  Libanius,  he 
composed  an  elaborate  work  against  it.^ 

To  this  treatise  of  Julian  the  Church  owes  one  of  the 
greatest  works  of  .S.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  :  his  vindica- 

2  The  elder  Apollinaris  wrote  Greek  hexameters  on  the  Old 
Testament  History  (Sozom.  V.  18).  The  younger  Apollinaris  reduced 
the  writings  of  the  New  Testament  into  the  form  of  Platonic  dialogues 
(Soar.  iii.  16). 

2  Which  are  contained  in  the  second  volume  of  his  works  (ed.  Ben.). 
The  Greek  Tragedy,  "  Christus  Patiens,"  printed  in  the  works  of 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  torn.  ii.  pp.  1205 — 1354,  ed.  Paris.  1840,  belongs 
probably  to  the  same  period. 

'•  See  above,  p.  162.  ^  See  below,  p.  151. 


i68        Julian's  witness  to  the  Faith  of  the  Chiuxh, 

tlon  of  Christianity^  in  ten  books  against  Julian. 
And  it  had  its  uses  in  other  respects.  In  it  Juhan, 
the  bitterest  foe  of  the  Gospel,  bears  testimony  that 
the  following  articles  were  publicly  professed  by  the 
Church  at  that  time  ;  viz. — 

(i)  That  there  is  one  Supreme  Ruler  of  the  Universe; 
in  opposition  to  the  tenet  of  Heathenism,  and  of  Julian 
himself,  that  different  nations  are  under  the  care  of 
different  deities.''' 

(2)  That  Christianity  proclaims  salvation  through 
Christ  to  all  without  distinction,  and  unites  all  nations 
in  the  worship  of  that  one  God. 

(3)  That  in  this  One  Godhead  there  are  three 
divine  Essences  ;  and  that  this  doctrine  is  expressed 
in  the  commission  given  by  Christ  to  His  Apostles  to 
baptize  all  nations  in  the  Name  of  the  Father,  and  of 
the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.^ 

(4)  That  Christ  is  Creator  and  God  ;  and  is  to  be 
worshipped  by  all  as  God.^ 

(5)  That  Christians  then  called  the  Blessed  Virgin 
Mary  OeoroKo^'^  (mother  of  God),  and  thus  declared 
His  two  Natures  (as  God  and  Man)  in  One  Person. 

(6)  That  Christ  worked  miracles  ;  walked  on  the 
sea  ;  cast  out  devils.^ 

(7)  That  Christian  Baptism  cleanses  the  soul,  and 
washes  aw^ay  sin.^ 

Such  is  Julian's  witness  to  the  faith. 

6  S.  Cyril,  Opera,  torn.  vi.  part  ii.  ed.  Paris.  1638,  where  it  occupies 
363  pages. 

7  S.  Cyril  c.  Julian,  iv.  131  ;  vii.  23S. 

8  Ibid.  vi.  291. 

5  Ibid.  V.  159  ;  vi.  213  ;  viii.  262. 

^  Ibid.  viii.  262,  Bsotokov  vfxeis  ohirav^aQe  Mapiav  KaXovvTss.  Cp. 
p.  276. 

3  Ibid.  vi.  213.  3  ibij_  vii.  245. 


Mark  of  Arethiisa — George  of  Cappadocia— Council  169 
of  Alexandria. 

His  connivance  also  at  the  persecutions  of  Chris- 
tians had  the  effect  of  drawing  off  Christians  from 
controversy,  and  of  concentrating  their  attention  on 
external  dangers.  Their  former  strifes  were  absorbed 
into  a  combined  effort  to  maintain  the  Truth  ;  and 
we  find  in  the  martyrology  of  those  who  suffered  for 
the  faith  under  Julian,  the  names  of  some  who  had 
depraved  it  by  heresy,  and  distracted  it  by  schism, 
such  as  Mark  of  Arethusa. 

It  has  been  supposed  by  some  ^  that  even  George 
of  Cappadocia,  who  supplanted  Athanasius  at  Alex- 
andria, and  had  enforced  an  heretical  creed  on 
the  Catholics  there,  but  was  afterwards  famous  for 
his  zeal  against  Heathenism,  and  perished  for  it  in 
a  popular  insurrection  against  him,^  was  after- 
wards canonized  by  the  Church,  and  has  been 
"  transformed  into  the  renowned  S.  George  of 
England,  the  patron  of  arms,  of  chivalry,  and  of  the 
Garter." « 

The  murder  of  George,  together  with  Julian's  edict 
of  Toleration,  brought  back  Athanasius  after  an 
absence  of  about  six  years  (from  Feb.  9,  A.D.  356, 
to  A.D.  362),  and  led  to  the  assembling  of  the  Council 
of  Alexandria,^  in  which,  with  Eusebius  of  Vercellae, 
and  Eustathius  of  Antioch,  and  many  Egyptian 
Bishops,  Athanasius  determined  the  question — What 
was   to   be  done   with   those    who   had  lapsed    into 

^  E.g.  by  Gibbon,  ch.  xxiii.  ;  see  the  next  note  but  one. 

*  Amnion,  xxii.  3. 

*  Gibbon,  ibid.  ch.  xxiii.  Gibbon  calls  this  "transformation  not 
absolutely  certain,  but  extremely  probable;"  and  in  his  "Table  of 
Contents"  he  says,  "  George  is  worshipped  as  a  Saint  and  a  ^Martyr.'* 
But  the  S.  George  of  England  is  now  more  generally  supposed  to  belong 
to  an  earlier  period. 

7  Concil.  General,  ii.  809. 


1 70  Restoration  of  the  ^Uapsed" — Rigour  and  I'ashness  of 

Lucifer  of  Cagliari.  Schism  at  Ajitioch. 
Arianism,®  and  who  had  repented  of  their  error,  and 
desired  to  be  restored  to  the  communion  of  the 
Church  ?  All  who  were  willing  to  subscribe  the 
Creed  of  Nicaea,  and  to  condemn  the  heresy  of  those, 
such  as  Euzoius  and  Eudoxius,  who  said  that  the 
Son  of  God  was  a  Creature,  were  re-admitted  by  the 
decree  of  the  Council  to  Christian  fellowship. 

Thus  Athanasius  wisely  endeavoured  to  obviate 
the  schism  which  was  afterwards  created  at  Antioch 
by  the  heat,  haste,  and  harshness  of  Lucifer  of 
Cagliari,  who  refused  to  receive  them  to  communion 
on  any  terms,  and  who  even  proceeded  so  far  as  to 
consecrate  Paulinustobe  Bishop  of  Antioch  (although 
the  orthodox  Meletius  was  Bishop  there),  and  thus 
caused  a  schism  which  lasted  to  A.D.  415. 

The  Council  of  Alexandria  under  Athanasius  also 
rendered  great  service  by  healing  another  breach.  It 
determined  that  the  word  hypostasis  might  without 
offence  be  used  in  the  same  sense  as  Person ;  and  it 
affirmed  the  consubstantial  divinity  of  the  Person  of 
the  Holy  Ghost ;  it  also  condemned  the  heresy 
afterwards  known  as  the  ApoUinarian,  that  the  Son 
of  God  had,  as  Man,  only  a  human  body  without  a 
reasonable  sonl. 

Julian  was  stirred  up  by  the  enemies  of  the  faith 
(Theodoret  does  not  scruple  to  say,  by  the  Powers  of 
darkness  ^)  to  assail  Athanasius.  "  No  one  would 
continue  to  be  a  heathen  at  Alexandria,"  they  said, 
"if  Athanasius  was  allowed  to  remain  there."  When 
Athanasius  allecred  that  he   had    availed  himself  of 


't)" 


8  See  above,  chap.  i.  p.  32,  and  Athan.  ad  Antiochenos,  p.  318,  and 
Lpist.  ad  Rufinianum,  p.  768,  ed.  Bened.  1 777. 
3  Theodoret,  iii.  5.     Compare  above,  p.  156. 


Julianas  persecution  of  A  thanasius.  171 

Julian's  edict  of  Toleration,  the  Emperor's  reply  was 
that  he  had  allowed  the  exiled  Bishops  "  to  return 
to  their  homes,  but  not  to  their  churches."  ^  Julian 
sent  orders  that  he  should  be  banished  ^  from  the 
city  and  from  Egypt.  He  speaks  with  reverence 
of  its  deity  "  Serapis,  and  of  his  friend  Arius,"  and  in 
contemptuous  terms  of  Athanasius,  whom  he  reviled 
as  a  "meddler,"  a  "miscreant,"  a  ''paltry  manikin,'" 
"  the  enemy  of  the  gods,  who  has  presumed  in  my 
reign  to  baptize  noble  Grecian  ladies."  He  censures 
the  Alexandrians  for  "  worshipping  God  the  Word, 
whom  their  fathers  had  not  known.  Hearken  to  me," 
he  says,  "  and  return  to  the  truth.  For  twenty  years  of 
my  life  I  walked  in  the  path  which  you  are  treading  " 
(that  of  Christianity),  "but  now  by  the  help  of  the 
gods  I  have  been  walking  for  twelve  years  in  that 
which  I  now  tread."  ^ 

He  ordered  them  to  put  Athanasius  to  death,  who 
therefore  ^  left  Alexandria  for  his  fourth  banishment. 
''This  cloud  will  soon  pass  away,"  he  said  •,^  and 
having  embarked  in  a  boat  on  the  Nile,  he  was 
sailing  up  the  river,  when  he  heard  that  the  persons 
who  were  ordered  to  kill  him  were  following  him,  and 
he  told  the  boatman  to  turn  back.  When  he  met  his 
pursuers,  they  asked,  "  Where  is  Athanasius  }  "  '^  He 
is  not  far  off"  was  his  reply ;  and  he  sailed  by  them, 
and  remained  in  Alexandria  till  the  death  of  Julian. 

*  Julian,  Epist.  to  the  Alexandrines,  26,  p.  398. 

2  Theodoret,  iii.  5.   Soar.  ii.  13,  14.   Sozom.  v.  15.  Julian,  Epist.  6  to 
Ecdicius,  Praefect  of  Egypt,  p.  376;  Epist.  51  to  the  Alexandrines,  p.  432. 

3  audpuiricrKos  eureA^y,  Julian  ad  Alexandrinos,  Epist.  51,  p.  435. 

■*  Epist.  51;  written  therefore  after  Nov.  6,  362.    Julian  was  bom 
Nov.  6,  331. 

*  Theodoret,  iii.  5. 

'  Sozom.  iii.  14.     Theodoret,  iii.  5. 


i']2  Julianas  endeavour  to  rebuild  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem. 

The  most  memorable  act  in  Julian's  deep-laid 
design  for  the  subversion  of  Christianity,  and  for  the 
restoration  of  Heathenism,  was  his  attempt,  in  the  last 
year  of  his  reign,  A.D.  363,  to  rebuild  the  Temple  at 
Jerusalem,  and  to  erect  a  fabric  on  Mount  Moriah  which 
would  eclipse  the  splendour  of  the  Church  built  by 
Constantine  on  Calvary.  In  this  endeavour  he  not  only 
had  Heathenism  as  his  ally,  but  Judaism  also.  The 
Jews  being  asked  by  Julian,  Why  they  did  not  offer 
the  sacrifices  prescribed  in  their  own  law,  replied  that 
sacrifices  could  not  be  offered  according  to  that  law 
in  any  other  place  than  that  which  the  law  enjoined, 
the  Temple  at  Jerusalem.  He  would  therefore,  he 
said,  enable  them  to  comply  with  their  law  by  re- 
building their  Temple  ;7  and  he  promised  also  that 
when  he  had  returned  victorious  from  his  campaign 
in  Persia,  he  would  rebuild  their  City  also.^ 

Julian  did  this,  not  in  any  love  for  their  religion, 
which  in  his  writings  he  treated  with  scorn  ,^  but 
in  order  to  enlist  them  in  his  service  against  Chris- 
tianity. Julian  knew,  and  some  of  the  Jews  knew, 
that  Jesus  Christ  had  pre-announced  to  the  Jews  the 
destruction  of  their  Temple,  and  that  He  had  foretold 
that  not  "  one  stone  would  remain  on  another,"  and 
that  "  their  house  would  be  left  unto  them  desolate/^ 
because  "  they  knew  not  the  day  of  their  visitation."  ^ 
Therefore  in  his  attempt  to  rebuild  the  Temple  at 
Jerusalem,  Julian  was  an  antagonist  of  Christ.     He 

7  Sozom.  V.  22.    Socr.  iii.  20.     S.  Chrys.  in  Jud.  iii.  p.  435. 

8  Julian,  Epist.  25  ad  Judseos,  p.  398. 

3  Julian,  Frag.  pp.  541,  542,  where  he  speaks  contemptuously  of  the 
Hebrew  Prophets  ;  cp.  Sozom.  v.  22.  He  derided  (says  Gibbon 
ch.  xxiii.)  the  Mosaic  history  and  the  Christian  dispensation,  and  pre- 
ferred the  Greek  Poets  to  the  Hebrew  Prophets. 

*  Matt,  xxiii.  -^^^  ;  xxiv.  2.     Luke  xix.  44. 


Julianas  atitagonism  to  Christ.  173 

entered  the  lists  against  Him  ;  he  challenged  Him 
as  a  false  prophet ;  he  proclaimed  publicly  to  the 
world  that  he  would  convict  Him  of  falsehood  ;  and 
he  engaged  God's  ancient  people  the  Jews,  who  had 
crucified  Jesus  Christ,  in  a  confederacy  with  him 
against  Christ ;  and  he  hoped  by  this  confederacy  to 
show  that  Christianity  was  a  fraud,  and  to  re-instate 
Heathenism  in  its  room. 

The  progress  and  result  of  this  enterprise  is  related 
by  Christian  writers — by  Gregory  Nazianzen  in  one  of 
his  orations  ^  composed  only  a  year  after  the  event, 
by  Cyril  Bishop  of  Jerusalem  at  the  time,^  by  S. 
Ambrose  a  few  years  afterwards,^  and  by  the  Church- 
historians  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries,  Rufinus,^ 
Theodoret,^  Socrates,'  Sozomen,^  and  by  Chrysostom,^ 
and  by  the  Arian  Philostorgius ;  ^  and  no  ancient 
contradiction  of  their  testimony  has  been  adduced.^ 

The  Emperor  made  costly  preparations  for  the 
work  ;  he  summoned  skilful  artificers  from  various 
quarters,  and  appointed  one  of  his  most  trusty 
and    dear    friends,^   Alypius     of  Antioch,    who  had 

2  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  iv. 

^  Cyril  ap.  Socr.  iii.  20. 

^  Ambrose,  Epist.  40.  The  words  of  Ambrose  to  the  Emperor 
Theodosius  in  that  letter  are  remarkable  :  "  Hast  thou  not  heard, 
O  Emperor,  that  when  Julian  had  commanded  the  Temple  of  Jeru- 
salem to  be  rebuilt,  they  who  were  engaged  in  the  work  were  consumed 
by  divine  fire?" 

^  Rufin.  X.  37. 

^  Theodoret,  iii.  15.  '  Socr.  iii.  20. 

*  Sozom.  V.  22. 

'•>  Chrysostom  c.  Judseos,  i.  580,  646  ;  ii.  574,  ed.  Ben. 

*  Philostorg.  vii.  9,  14. 

2  Julian  himself  seems  to  refer  to  it,  Frag.  Epist.  p.  295,  quoted  by 
Warburton,  Julian  i.  ch.  4 ;  Newman,  clxxviii. 

3  See  Julian's  two  letters  to  Alypius,  whom  he  calls  his  **  dearest 
brother,"  Epist.  29  and  30,  p.  402. 


174  Julian' s  attempt  to  rebuild  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem:  its 

results. 
been  Pretorian  Vicar  in  Britain,  to  superintend  the 
design  which  (as  the  heathen  historian  Ammianus 
says)  was  intended  by  him  to  be  an  illustrious  monu- 
ment of  his  reign  ;  and  he  ordered  the  royal  trea- 
surers to  supply  the  funds  requisite  for  the  purpose. 

The  Jews  responded  gladly  to  the  call.  Some 
flocked  to  Jerusalem/  and  took  part  personally  in 
the  work.  Jewish  women  contributed  their  costliest 
ornaments  for  its  expense,  and  in  the  enthusiasm  of 
hope  and  joy  the  Jews  made  spades  and  pickaxes 
and  baskets  of  silver  for  what  they  considered  an  act 
of  zealous  devotion  to  the  service  of  their  God. 

The  result  is  described  as  follows.  After  much 
time  and  toil  had  been  spent  in  clearing  out  the  site 
for  the  foundation,  and  materials  had  been  collected 
for  the  reconstruction  of  the  Temple,  they  were  sud- 
denly swept  away  by  a  hurricane  and  whirlwind. 
When  this  tornado  had  ceased,  the  preparations  for 
the  building  were  renewed  ;  these  also  were  over- 
thrown and  engulfed  by  an  earthquake,  and  some 
of  the  workmen  were  swallowed  up  by  it.  After  the 
earthquake,  others  returned  to  the  spot,  and  resumed 
the  work  of  building  the  Temple.  On  this  third 
attempt,  fire  burst  forth  from  the  foundations,  and 
consumed  some  of  the  builders ;  others  escaped  by 
flight.  No  further  endeavour  was  made,  the  work 
was  abandoned,  and  the  open  space  remained  as  a 
monument  of  the  abortive  enterprise. 

Such  is  the  testimony  of  the  Christian  writers 
already  mentioned. 

'*  Gibbon  says  (ch.  xxiii.),  "The  Jews  from  all  the  provinces  of  the 
Empire  assembled  on  the  holy  mountain  of  their  fathers,  and  their 
insolent  triumph  alarmed  and  exasperated  the  Christian  inhabitants  of 
Jerusalem." 


Testimony  of  the  heathen  historian ^  Ammianus  175 
Manellinus. 

But  this  narrative  does  not  rest  only  on  Christian 
testimony.  It  is  remarkable,  that,  as  it  pleased  God 
to  raise  up  a  celebrated  person,  a  Jew,  a  Priest,  a 
Pharisee,  and  a  soldier,  Josephus,  who  served  in  the 
army  of  Titus,  the  son  of  Vespasian,  to  give  to  the 
world  a  history  of  the  siege  and  destruction  of  the 
Temple  and  City  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Roman  armies, 
and  so  to  avouch  the  truth  of  Christ's  prophecies  con- 
cerning them  ;  so,  by  a  providential  dispensation,  a 
friend  and  eulogist  of  Julian,  a  soldier  serving  in  his 
army,  a  much-respected  heathen  historian,  Ammianus 
Marcellinus,  has  left  to  posterity  a  record  of  Julian's 
attempt  to  rebuild  the  Temple  of  Jerusalem,^  and  to 
falsify  Christ's  prophecy  concerning  it. 

Ammianus  thus  writes:^  "Julian  being  desirous 
of  perpetuating  the  memory  of  his  Empire  by  the 
magnitude  of  the  work,  resolved  to  restore  at  an 
enormous  cost  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  formerly 
so  magnificent,  but  which  after  much  internecine 
slaughter  had  been  first  besieged  by  Vespasian,  and 
then  with  difficulty  razed  to  the  ground  by  Titus. 
Julian  entrusted  the  work  to  Alypius,  formerly  pro- 
praefect  in  Britain.  When  he  was  strenuously  urging 
it  on,  and  the  Governor  of  the  province  was  assisting 

*  Gibbon  himself  thus  speaks  (chap,  xxiii.  p,  107):  "An  earthquake, 
a  whirlwind,  and  an  eruption  which  overturned  and  scattered  the  new 
foundations  of  the  Temple,  are  attested  with  some  variations  by  con- 
temporary and  respectable  evidence.  This  public  event  is  described  by 
Ambrose,  Bishop  of  Milan,  in  an  Epistle  to  the  Emperor  Theodosius  ; 
by  the  eloquent  Chrysostom,  who  might  appeal  to  the  memory  of  the 
elder  part  of  his  congregation  at  Antioch ;  and  by  Gregory  Nazianzen, 
who  published  his  account  of  the  miracle  before  the  expiration  of  the 
same  year.  The  last  of  these  writers  has  boldly  declared  that  this 
preternatural  event  was  not  disputed  by  infidels,  and  his  assertion  is 
confirmed  by  the  unexceptionable  contemporaneous  testimony  of 
Ammianus  Marcellinus." 

*  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxiii.  I. 


176  Consequences  of  the  attempt. 

him,  terrific  balls  of  fire  burst  forth  with  frequent 
eruptions  near  the  foundations,  and  made  the  place 
inaccessible  to  the  workmen,  some  of  whom,  at  dif- 
ferent times,  were  consumed  by  fire.  Thus,  when  the 
elements  obstinately  repelled  them,  the  work  ceased."  ^ 
That  work,  which  was  designed  by  Julian,  warring 
against  Christ,  to  be  a  monument  of  his  own  glory, 
and  to  be  a  proof  of  Christ^s  falsehood,  and  to  be  a 
triumph  of  heathenism  over  Christianity,  recoiled  upon 
Julian  to  his  confusion,  and  redounded  to  the  honour 
of  Christ,  and  to  the  confirmation  of  Christians  in  the 
faith,  and  to  the  conversion  of  many  Jews  and  Gen- 
tiles to  the  Gospel.^  Some  historians  add  that  after 
this  event  a  luminous  Cross  appeared  in  the  sky  over 
Jerusalem,  and  that  crosses  were  imprinted  on  the 
garments  of  many  persons  in  the  cit}^^ 

But  now  the  end  was  near.  When  Julian  was  insti- 
eatine  and  aidinsf  the  conflict  of  Heathenism  and 
Judaism  against  Christianity  at  Jerusalem,  he  was 
also  personally  engaged  in  a  campaign  against  Sapor, 
king  of  Persia,  and  he  promised  the  Jews  that  on  his 
return  from  it  he  would  rebuild  their  city,  and 
would  exterminate  the  Galilaeans.^ 

The  narrative  of  the  causes  and  progress  of  that 

7  For  further  remarks  on  this  history,  the  reader  may  refer  to  Bishop 
Warburton's  "Julian,"  Works,  vol.  viii.  ed.  Lond.  iSii,  pp.  I— 236; 
Cardinal  Newman  on  Ecclesiastical  Miracles,  pp.  clxxv — clxxxiv. 

8  Theodoret,  iii.  15.     Sozom.  v.  22. 

9  Theodoret,  iii.  15.  Sozom.  v.  22.  Socr.  iii.  20.  As  to  the 
impression  of  crosses  on  garments,  see  Tillemont  on  S.  Jerome, 
Art.  142,  Ann.  419,  tom.  xii.  548  ;  Warburton's  Julian,  pp.  122 — 126, 
and  the  singular  statement  quoted  from  Isaac  Casaubon  as  to  the  pheno- 
menon of  the  crosses  impressed  on  bodies  in  Wells  Cathedral  in 
A.D.  1596. 

^  Theodoret,  iii.  16. 


Responses  of  heathen  Oracles — Cliristlan  predictions.     177 

Persian  expedition  belongs  rather  to  civil  history.^ 
But  it  may  be  observed,  that  while  he  desired  and 
endeavoured  to  falsify  the  prophecies  of  Christ,  he  was 
consulting  his  own  deities  on  the  future  success  of  his 
enterprise.  He  sent  envoys  to  the  Oracles  of  Apollo 
at  Delphi  and  Delos,  and  of  Jupiter  at  Bodona,^  and 
the  responses  to  them  were  favourable :  "  Go  and 
conquer.-"  The  language  of  one  of  these  Oracles  is 
recorded  :  "  We,  all  the  gods,  have  marched  forth  to 
win  trophies  of  victory  at  the  wild-beast  river ^  and  I, 
the  impetuous  battle-stormer  Mars,  will  be  the  leader." 
Julian  supposed  the  river  designated  as  3.  wild  beast  io 
mean  the  Tigris^  and  he  was  encouraged  by  that 
assurance  to  march  onward  to  its  banks.  His  friend 
Maximus,  the  philosophic  Magician,  announced  to  him 
the  same  prosperous  issue  of  the  campaign.  The 
presages  of  the  Christians  concerning  Julian  were 
different,  and  were  proved  by  the  event  to  be  more 
true.  "This  cloud  will  soon  pass  away"  was  the 
prediction  of  Athanasius,  when  driven  by  Julian  from 
Alexandria.  "  What  is  the  son  of  the  carpenter 
doing  ? "  was  the  question  of  Julian's  friend,  the 
Sophist  Libanius,^  at  Antioch,  where  he  looked  for  a 
sure  and  speedy  victory  ;  "  He  whom  thou  callest  the 
son  of  a  carpenter  is  the  Creator  of  all  things,  and  is 
now  making  a  coffin,"  was  the  Christian  teacher's 
reply.  The  death  of  Julian  seems  to  have  been  made 
known  to  some  Christians  like  Didymus  and  Sabas  by 
supernatural  means.® 

*  See  Gibbon,  chap.  xxiv. 

3  Theodoret,  iii.  16.  The  site  of  Dodojia  must  therefore  have  been 
\Aell  known  at  that  time.  May  I  refer  to  my  Article,  on  its  discovery,  in 
tlie  "Journal  of  Hellenic  Studies,"  vol.  ii.  p.  22S? 

*  Ibid.,  Trapa  Qr\f\  Trora^aj.  *   Ibid.  iii.  l8. 

*  Sozom.  vi.  2.      Theodoret,  iii.  19. 

VOL.  n.  N 


I  yS  Julianas  victory — coiifidence  mid  ras/mess — His 
forebodings. 
Julian  was  a  believer  in  the  Pythagorean  doctrine 
of  the  transmigration  of  souls,  and  imagined  that  the 
soul  of  Alexander  the  Great  had  passed  into  himself, 
and  that  Alexander's  victories  in  Persia  would  be 
reproduced  in  his  own.'  At  first  all  things  seemed 
prosperous.  He  engaged  the  Persians  on  the  left 
bank  of  the  Tigris,  and  gained  a  brilliant  victory. 
The  words  of  one  oracle  seemed  to  be  now  verified, 
and  he  hoped  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  rest.  Only 
seventy-five  Romans  had  fallen  in  the  battle,  while 
the  enemy  had  lost  more  than  two  thousand  men. 
He  pursued  them  to  the  gates  of  the  city  Ctesiphon. 
Elated  by  triumph,  and  deceived  by  a  Persian  spy,  he 
rashly  determined  to  push  forward  into  the  heart  of 
the  country  ;  and  he  ordered  his  ships  to  be  burnt. 
But  he  was  deceived  by  the  perfidy  of  his  guides,  and 
in  distress  and  self-reproach  at  his  reckless  infatuation 
he  sounded  a  retreat  towards  the  Tigris.  The  Per- 
sians, vv^ho  before  had  been  on  the  defensive,  now  be- 
came the  assailants.  His  heathen  chronicler  ^  relates 
that  when  his  mind  was  agitated  with  anxiety  for  the 
safety  of  his  troops,  in  the  silent  hour  of  night,  "  the 
Genius  of  the  Empire  "  (whom  he  had  seen  in  Gaul, 
and  who  had  then  encouraged  him  to  march  against 
Constantius  as  a  rival  for  the  throne)  "  appeared  to 
him,  covering  his  own  head,  and  the  horn  of  abun- 
dance (Cornucopia),  with  a  funeral  veil,  and  then 
vanished  from  his  tent  with  a  doleful  look  of  sorrow. 
Julian  rose  from  his  couch,  went  forth  into  the  air  and 
saw  a  fiery  meteor  shooting  across  the  sky,  and  then 
plunged  into  thick  gloom. ^  He  was  horror-struck  at  the 

"  Socr.  iii.  21. 

^  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxv.  2. 

■'  Ibid.     This  historian  was  in  Julian's  army  at  the  time. 


Defeat  and  death  -bed.  179 

sight,"  adds  the  historian  ;  "  he  had  seen  the  menacing 
aspect  of  the  star  of  Mars,  the  god  of  war,  who  had 
formerly  promised  to  lead  him  to  victory,  but  whose 
wrath  he  had  afterwards  incurred  by  a  rash  threat 
that  he  would  never  offer  him  any  more  sacrifices."  ^ 

At  break  of  day  Julian  led  his  troops  to  battle  ;  he 
was  foremost  in  the  attack,  which  at  first  was  success- 
ful. The  enemy  fled  before  him,  and  he  animated 
his  soldiers  in  the  pursuit  ;  but  a  volley  of  darts  and 
arrows  was  discharged  from  the  flying  squadron.  It 
was  the  height  of  summer,  and  on  account  of  the 
heat  of  the  sun,^  whom  he  worshipped  as  a  god,^  he  had 
thrown  off  his  cuirass,  and  was  therefore  exposed  to 
more  danger.  He  was  mortally  wounded  by  a  javelin 
from  an  unknown  hand,  and  was  carried  from  the 
battle  into  his  tent,  and  on  the  morrow,  June  26, 
A.D.  363,  at  midnight  he  died.* 

Such  was  the  end  of  Julian,  the  last  survivor  of  the 
family  of  Constantius  Chlorus,  the  father  of  Con- 
stantine. 

The  death-bed  of  Julian  was  surrounded  by  sor- 
rowing friends.^  And  doubtless  both  in  life  and  death 
he  had  strong  claims  for  commiseration.     His  early 

1  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxiv.  6. 

2  This  is  stated  by  Zonaras,  5ja  rb  fidpos  koI  t^u  e'/c  rod  7}  Xi 0  v 
<b\6y(i)crLv  {64povs  yap  7iv  aK/xr])  rhv  OupaKa  iK^vadixevos  :  and  Libanius  (in 
Orat.  Funeb.  p.  303)  says  that  he  was  unarmed  (aoTrAos).  Zonaras 
adds  that  Julian,  when  he  was  at  Antioch,  had  seen  in  a  dream 
a  youthful  figure,  which  said  to  him  that  he  would  die  in  Phrygia. 
Vv'hen  on  his  death-bed  (see  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxv.  3),  he  asked 
what  was  the  name  of  the  place  in  Persia  in  which  he  was,  and  the 
reply  was  Phrygia-,  to  which  he  answered,  "0  Sun,  thou  hast 
destroyed  Julian  ! " 

3  Julian,  Epist.  13.  Orat.  iv.  p.  130,  "On  the  Sun,  the  King." 

*•  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxv.  3.     In  the  32nd  year  of  his  age,  after  a 
reign  of  one  year,  eight  months,  and  twenty-three  days. 
*  "Demissi  et  tristes,"  Ammian.  Marcellin.  ibid. 

K    2 


1 8o  Julian— his  character  and  acts. 

}'ears  were  passed  in  seclusion  and  without  sympathy. 
This  has  been  already  described.^  And  we  cannot 
fail  to  recognize  that  in  some  respects  he  stands  forth 
as  a  noble  contrast  to  those  who  have  warred  against 
Christianity  in  ancient  and  modern  times.  He  was 
not  an  Atheist :  far  from  it  ;  he  had  a  deeply-rooted 
faith  in  the  existence  of  divine  powers,  and  in  their 
superintendence  and  control  of  the  affairs  of  the 
Universe.  Everything  in  his  eyes  was  full  of  deity. 
He  looked  also  forward  to  a  future  eternal  world,  in 
v\Ahich  the  soul,  which  had  been  conscious  on  earth  of 
its  divine  origin  and  glorious  destiny,  and  which  had 
therefore  loved  on  earth  what  was  true,  just,  and 
pure,  would,  when  delivered  from  the  burden  and 
corruption  of  the  body,  have  uninterrupted  and  eter- 
nal communion  with  heavenly  and  divine  beings.^ 

This  belief,  which  was  deeply  seated  in  his  heart, 
and  was  expressed  energetically  in  his  life,  produced 
whatever  was  noble  and  virtuous  in  his  character, 
temperance,  justice,  fortitude,  and  prudence — as  por- 
trayed by  the  heathen  historian  of  his  actions.^ 

But  while  this  is  in  all  fairness  recognized  and 
affirmed,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  Julian,  having 
been  educated  as  a  Christian,  deliberately  renounced 
the  faith,  and  put  forth  all  the  energies  of  his  imperial 
power,  and  of  his  intellectual  faculties,  in  deliberate 
and  strenuous  endeavours  to  subvert  Christianity,  and 
to  restore  Heathenism.  He  led  Heathenism,  allied 
with  Judaism,  to  the  battle  against  Christianity. 
In  the  whole  range  of  Greek  and  Roman  history  no 

*  See  above,  p.  146. 

7  See  his  oration  on  his  death-bed  in  Animianus,  xxv.  3. 

8  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxv.  4.  False  Religions,  as  contrasted  with 
Atheism,  may  conduce  to  temporal  good,  as  has  been  well  shown  by 
Hooker,  V.  i. 


Review  ofjiiliaiis  cha7-acter.  18  r 

one  can  be  mentioned  who  worshipped  the  deities 
of  Paganism  with  more  fervour  and  devotion  than 
Juhan.  He  was  an  imperial  personification  of  the 
reh'gion  of  Heathenism  ;  and  if  the  power  of  the  gods 
of  the  heathen  Pantheon  was  to  be  measured  by  the 
success  of  its  votaries,  no  one  had  so  good  a  claim  to 
aggrandizement  and  glorification  at  their  hands  as 
he  had,  and  as  he  claimed  to  have. 

The  history  of  his  endeavour  to  subvert  Christianity 
and  to  restore  Heathenism  has  now  been  traced,  and 
at  the  close  of  his  short  reign  we  may  pause  with 
sadness,  not  unmingled  with  awe,  when  we  inquire 
into  the  cause  which  led  to  such  consequences. 

The  heathen  historian '  has  revealed  the  ruling 
passion  of  his  life,  vain-glory,  when  he  says,  ''  Julian 
was  fond  of  the  sound  of  his  own  voice,  and  could 
rarely  hold  his  tongue.  He  rejoiced  in  the  applause  of 
the  vulgar,  and  had  an  intemperate  appetite  for  praise 
even  from  the  pettiest  things  ;  and  loved  to  talk  even 
Vv'ith  unworthy  men,  from  an  inordinate  passion  for 
popularity." 

His  taste  had  been  vitiated  in  early  life  by  the  un- 
natural affectation,  tinsel  ornaments,  and  pompous 
self-conceit  and  self-display  of  such  vain-glorious 
rhetoricians  as  his  favourite  author  and  model  Liba- 
nius  ;  ^  and  it  is  no  wonder  that  he  had  no  relish  for 


^  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  xxv.  4,  "  Linguas  fusioris  et  admodum  raro 
silentis.  Vulgi  plausibus  laetiis,  laudum  etiam  ex  minimis  rebus 
intemperans  appetitor,  popularitatis  cupiditate  cum  indignis  loqui 
scepe  afifectans."  See  also  De  Broglie,  L'Eglise  et  I'Empire  au  ^ieme 
Siecle,  iv.  407 — 410,  who  has  drawn  his  character  with  a  skilful  and  im- 
partial hand. 

^  It  is  well  observed  by  Neander,  iii.  p.  52,  that  the  lectures  of 
Libanius,  of  which  Julian  was  passionately  enamoured,  "  being  barren 
and  dry  as  to  all  genuine  reflection  or  imagination,  and  rich  only  in 


iS2  His  moral  defects  and  disqualifications. 

the  healthful  sobriety  and  homely  vigour  and  noble 
simplicity  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ. 

He  was  deficient  in  that  princely  dignity  and 
majesty,  which  is  expected  in  royal  personages  ;  as  is 
clear  from  his  condescending  to  skirmish  in  a  battle  of 
words  and  in  a  satirical  burlesque  on  his  own  subjects 
at  Antioch,"  interspersed  with  grotesque  raillery  on 
his  own  personal  appearance,  and  from  his  pasqui- 
nade on  his  own  predecessors  in  the  imperial  throne.^ 
Above  all,  he  was  devoid  of  that  modesty  and  humi- 
lity which  dispose  men  to  seek  for  divine  truth,  and 
to  be  ready  to  receive  it;  and  he  lacked  that  simplicity 
of  mind  and  singleness  of  purpose  which  make  them 
love  truth  for  truth's  sake.  He  was  wanting  in  that 
gravity,  seriousness,  and  earnestness  of  purpose  which 
are  needful  for  a  Christian. 

His  life  was  a  sophistical  study  and  rhetorical 
exercise  of  the  schools  ;  he  was  fond  of  placing  himself 
in  picturesque  theatrical  attitudes,  playing  the  part 
of  an  actor  with  histrionic  artifice,  and  straining 
every  nerve  for  dramatic  and  scenic  effect,  even  on 
his  death-bed.*  No  wonder  that  the  Gospel  of  Christ 
had  no  attractions  for  him,  and  that  he  loathed  that 
spiritual  food  which  can  only  be  tasted  by  the  palate 
of  faith. 

This  want  of  simplicity  was  combined  in  Julian's 
character    with     disingenuousness     and     insincerity, 

ornaments  of  rhetoric,  could  have  attractions  only  for  an  ill-ordered 
mind,  unaccustomed  to  healthy  nourishment,  alien  from  simplicity,  and 
easily  pleased  with  the  glare  of  superficial  ornament. 

2  In  his  Misopogon,  Opera,  pp.  337 — 371,  ed.  1696. 

3  In  his  work  entitled  "  The  Ccesars,"  Opera,  pp.  306 — 336,  ed 
Spanheim,  1696,     See  above,  p.  151. 

*  See  his  studied  oration  on  his  death-bed  in  Ammianus  Marcellinus 
XXV.  3. 


Solution  of  the  eiiigina  of  his  character.  1S3 

which  were  moral  disquahfications  for  a  right  appre- 
ciation of  the  beauty  of  the  Gospel  of  truth.  His 
professions  of  equity  and  toleration  in  dealing-  with 
the  Christians  were  a  hollow  and  hypocritical  mockery ; 
he  encouraged  heresies  in  order  that  he  might  rend 
the  Church  by  their  means;  his  paltry  quibble  on  th 
return  of  Athanasius  -^  w^as  a  specimen  of  his  policy  ; 
his  flattery  and  patronage  of  Judaism,  in  promising 
to  rebuild  the  Temple  and  City  of  Jerusalem,  wer 
specious  pretences  and  delusions  which  unmasked 
themselves  by  the  contemptuous  and  sarcastic 
terms  in  which  he  spoke,  at  the  same  time,  of  Mose 
and  the  Prophets,  as  well  as  of  Christ  and  the 
Apostles.^ 

Even  his  acts  of  philanthropy  and  beneficence  had 
an  air  of  unreality.  They  appear,  as  we  have  seen,^ 
to  have  been  prompted  by  a  spirit  of  ambition  and 
emulation,  and  by  a  desire  to  vie  with  the  Christians 
in  their  acts  of  mercy,  and  to  win  for  heathenism  a 
popularity  for  virtues  which  he  envied  rather  than  loved. 

The  character  of  Julian  has  been  called  by  some  a 
mysterious  enigma.  But  the  solution  of  that  enigma 
is  not  hard  to  find  for  those  who  believe  those  sacred 
writings  which  Julian  knew  and  despised. 

If  it  be  true  that  "  mysteries  are  revealed  to  the 
meek,"  ^  and  that  "  the  secret  of  the  Lord  is  among  them 
that  fear  Him  ;^  and  that  them  that  are  meek  shall 
He  guide  in  judgment,  and  such  as  are  gentle,  them 
shall  He  learn  His  way ;"  ^  and  that  "whosoever  willeth 


*  Above,  p.  171.  ^  Above,  p.  172. 

7  Above,    p.  162,  in   his  letter  to  Arsacius  the  heathen  Priest  of 
Galatia  on  the  erection  of  asylums,  &c. 

8  Ecclus.  iii.  19.  '  Ts.  xxv.  13. 
»  Ps.  xxv.  8. 


1 84     Retributive  consequences  of  ]iis  disposition  and  acts. 

to  do  God's  win  shall  know  of  the  doctrine  ;"  ^  and  that 
He  "hides  His  mysteries  from  those  who  in  their  own 
conceits  are  wise  and  prudent,^  and  reveals  them  to 
those  who  in  simplicity  are  babes.;"  and  that  men  "must 
become  meek  and  docile  as  little  children,*  if  they  are 
to  enter  into  the  Kingdom  of  God  ;"  if  it  be  true  that 
"  He  turneth  wise  men  backward,  and  maketh  diviners 
mad,'"  then  w^e  are  not  to  be  surprised  at  Julian's 
defection  from  the  faith,  and  at  the  subtle  devices 
and  heartless  malignity  with  v/hich  he  endeavoured  to 
undermine  and  subvert  it.  If  also  it  be  true  that  they 
"  who  have  been  once  enlightened,^  and  have  tasted 
of  the  heavenly  gift,  and  were  made  partakers  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  have  tasted  the  good  word  of  God, 
cannot  be  recovered  while  they  are  crucifying  the  Son 
of  God  afresh,  and  are  putting  Him  to  an  open  shame," 
it  would  indeed  have  been  a  strange  thing  if  the  career 
of  Julian  had  been  other  than  it  was,  inasmuch  as  he 
reviled  those  Scriptures  which  he  had  read  publicly  in 
the  Church,  and  washed  away  his  baptism  by  the 
blood  of  the  mysteries  of  Mithras,  and  after  twenty 
years'  profession  of  Christianity  took  up  arms  against 
it,  and  exerted  the  force  of  the  Roman  Empire  in 
a  deliberate  and  strenuous  endeavour  to  exterminate 
it,  and  to  restore  Heathenism  in  its  place. 

The  consequences  of  such  a  temper  and  habit  of 
mind,  and  of  such  acts  as  these,  were  as  disastrous  as 
they  were  inevitable.  He  was  punished  by  his  own 
devices.  He  renounced  the  truth,  and  was  given  over 
to  a  strong  delusion.    His  fate  inspires  awe  and  sorrow, 

"  John  viL  17,  s  :\[att.  xi.  25. 

•*  Matt,  xviii.  3.  s  2sa.  xliv.  25. 

'^  Heb.  vi.  4,  Tre(pooTi(r/j.euoi,  a  word  specially  applied  by  ancient 
M  rilers  to  Holy  Baptism — which  Julian  profaned  ;  see  above,  p.  154. 


"  Tilou  hast  cojiqueredj  O  Galilceaji  /  "  1S5 

and  teaches  the  wisdom  which  is  the  child  of  fear. 
He  was  chastised  with  judicial  blindness  for  his  re- 
jection of  Christianity,  and  became  a  victim  of  puerile 
credulity  and  degrading  superstition.'''  With  audacious 
self-confidence  and  self-conceit,  he  denied  the  truth  of 
Christ's  words,  and  resolved  to  show  the  falsehood  of 
His  prophecies  by  rebuilding  the  Temple  of  Jerusalem, 
and  he  was  ignominiously  baffled  in  that  attempt, 
which  recoiled  to  his  own  disgrace  and  redounded 
to  Christ's  glory.  He  despised  the  prophecies  of 
Christ,  and  abandoned  His  religion  and  worship  for 
that  of  the  heathen  gods,  and  he  was  beguiled  by  the 
false  predictions  and  the  lying  divinations  of  the 
oracles  of  those  gods,  to  his  own  destruction  in  that 
campaign  in  Persia  where  they  had  promised  him 
victory ;  ^  and  at  last  he  fell,  in  that  fatal  expedition, 
by  an  unknown  hand.  Therefore,  whether  the  actual 
words  were  spoken  by  him  ^  or  not,  his  history  pro- 
claims the  result  of  the  struggle  in  this  emphatic 
sentence — "  Thoti  hast  conquered,  O  Galilcean  !  "  {y^vi- 
K7]Ka^j    0)  VaXiXale.) 

•^  See  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  xxv.  4. 

8  As  the  friend  and  eulogist  Libanius  said  of  Julian  (de  Vita  sua, 
p.  46)  after  his  death, "  The  gods  made  him  the  most  brilliant  promise  ; 
at  first  they  refused  him  nothing,  at  last  they  totally  renounced  him  ; 
they  lured  him  on,  as  a  fisherman  lures  a  fish,  by  the  bait  of  an  Assyrian 
conquest  which  ended  in  his  death." 

9  As  is  asserted  by  Theodoret,  iii.  20. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

From  the  accession  of  the  Emperor  Jovian,  KJ^.  363, 
to  the  death  of  Athanasiiis,  A.D.  373. 

The  reign  of  Julian,  who  attempted  to  subvert 
Christianity,  and  to  restore  Heathenism,  was  favour- 
able in  its  results  to  the  one,  and  disastrous  to  the  other. 
It  had  the  effect  of  healing  the  schisms  of  the  Church, 
and  of  uniting  her  members  in  a  vigorous  resolve  to 
act  and  suffer  for  the  truth  ;  it  produced  many 
glorious  martyrdoms  ;  and  his  deliberate  endeavour 
to  overthrow  Christianity  by  rebuilding  the  Temple 
at  Jerusalem,  and  proving  thereby  that  Christ  was  a 
false  Prophet,  had  displayed  the  truth  of  Christ  to 
the  World,  and  had  manifested  the  infatuation  and 
futility  of  the  Emperor's  assaults  on  the  religion  he 
hoped  to  destroy.  In  the  eyes  also  of  that  large 
number  of  persons  who  measure  power  by  success, 
the  ill-fated  campaign  of  Julian  in  Persia  had  exposed 
the  inability  of  the  deities  of  heathenism,  whom  he 
worshipped,  to  prosper  the  arms  of  their  most  enthu- 
siastic votary.  The  heathen  themselves  could  hardly 
fail  to  mark  the  contrast  between  the  good  fortune 
of  two  Christian  Emperors,  Julian's  uncle  Constan- 
tine,  and  his  cousin  Constantius,  in  that  same  country, 
and  the  calamities  of  Julian  there,  disastrous  to 
the  Empire,  and  fatal  to  himself.  Constantine  had 
kept  Persia  in  check,  and  the  troops  of  Constantius, 


Inferences  f7-oin  Julian's  reign — Election  of  Jovian.    187 

who  was  far  inferior  to  Julian  in  military  skill  and 
courage,  had  achieved  a  brilliant  victory  over  the 
Persian  forces  at  Nisibis,  which  with  five  Mesopo- 
tamian  provinces  was  now  ceded  by  the  Romans  to 
Persia,  as  a  consequence  of  Julian's  disaster,  who  in 
A.D.  362  had  written  a  menacing  and  vaunting  letter 
to  Arsaces  the  Satrap,  in  which  he  commanded  him 
to  join  with  him  against  the  Persians ;  and  if  he  refused 
to  do  so,  "  Arsaces,"  he  said, ''  will  perish,  and  Nisibis 
will  share  his  fate." 

Julian  had  removed  the  Christian  Monogram 
from  the  Labarum  of  the  Roman  Legions,  where  it  had 
been  placed  by  the  hand  of  Constantine,  and  had 
substituted  the  initials  S.P.O.R.  for  it;  but  that 
removal  and  substitution  had  been  followed  by 
ignominy  and  loss  not  much  less  dishonourable  and 
deplorable  than  that  which  tarnished  the  Roman 
name  after  the  rout  of  Varus  in  Germany,  or  had 
been  incurred  by  the  Roman  legions  when  they  lost 
the  national  standards  in  the  Parthian  disaster  of 
Crassus. 

The  temper  of  a  military  Nation  may  be  inferred 
by  the  action  of  its  troops.  Julian  died  childless, 
and  the  appointment  of  his  successor  devolved  on  the 
Army.  On  the  27th  of  June,  the  day  after  Julian's 
death,  they  chose  Jovian,  the  chief  of  the  imperial 
body-guard,  but  not  a  general  of  the  forces.^ 

With  the  frankness  for  which  he  was  noted,  Jovian 
declared  himself  a  Christian ;  probably  this  was 
already  notorious,  for  he  had  incurred  disgrace  from 
Julian  for  the  bold  confession  of  his  faith.  His 
religion  did  not  disqualify  him  for  the  imperial 
dignity  in  the  eyes  of  his  comrades.     On  the  con- 

1  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxv.  5. 


1 88    Joviaiis  declaration  of  faith.   Julian's  burial  at 

Tarsus. 
trary,  when  he  said,  "  I,  who  am  a  Christian,  cannot 
take  the  command  of  an  Army  which  has  served 
under  Juhan,  and  is  infected  with  his  errors  ;  and  if  I 
did,  I  could  not  hope  for  a  blessing  from  heaven  on 
my  arms " — "  Do  not  hesitate.  Emperor,"  was  the 
reply,  "  to  accept  the  proffered  dignity  ;  we  also  are 
Christians  ;  the  elder  among  us  were  trained  in  the 
faith  by  Constantine,  the  younger  by  Constantius  ; 
and  the  reign  of  Julian  was  too  short  to  make  his 
errors  take  root  even  in  the  minds  of  those  who  for  a 
time  were  deceived  by  them."  ^ 

The  popular  feeling  of  the  Nation  as  a  whole  with 
regard  to  Christianity  as  compared  with  Heathen- 
ism may  be  inferred  from  this  choice,  and  from  the 
next  following  election  of  Valentinian,  also  a  Christian 
confessor  under  Julian. 

Jovian,  having  accepted  the  offer  of  the  throne, 
concluded  a  peace  with  Persia,  which  a  Roman 
historian^  calls  "disgraceful  but  necessary."  That 
peace  was  imputed  by  others  '^  to  Julian  rather  than 
to  Jovian.  He  commanded  Procopius,  the  near 
relative  of  Juhan,  to  convey  the  corpse  of  the 
Emperor  to  a  suburb  of  Tarsus  in  Cilicia,  where 
Julian  himself  had  desired  to  be  buried.*  It  is 
remarkable  that  one  who  had  renounced  Christianity 
for  Heathenism,  and  had  endeavoured  to  subvert  it, 
should  have  chosen  as  his  resting-place  the  city  in  which 
the  Apostle  was  born,  who  having  persecuted  the 
Gospel  became  its  noblest  preacher  to  the  Heathen 
world.  Perhaps  Julian  made  the  choice  because  he 
was  thus  brought  into  immediate  neighbourhood  to 

2  Theodoret,  iv.  i.     Socr.  iii.  22.  ^  Eutropius,  x.  17. 

4  As  Greg.  Nazian.  Orat.  iv.;  Augustine  de  Civ.  Dei,  iv.  29;  v.  21. 
*  Ammian.  IMarcellin.  xxiii.  2  ;  xxv.  9. 


/avian's  piety — his  letter  to  Athanasiics,  189 

the  last  Imperial  Persecutor  of  Christianity,  Maxi- 
minus,  who  was  buried  within  a  short  distance  of  the 
spot  selected  by  Julian  for  his  own  grave. 

Jovian  appears  to  have  been  firmly  persuaded  that 
national  prosperity  depends  on  the  blessing  of  God. 
He  declared  this  to  his  army,  and  one  of  his  first  acts 
Y/as  to  restore  the  Christian  symbol  to  the  Labarum 
of  the  Roman  legions.  He  gave  back  to  the  Churches 
and  Clergy  the  franchises,  immunities,  and  endow- 
ments sequestered  by  his  predecessor ;  and  he  re- 
instated the  Bishops  who  had  been  ejected  from  their 
sees  for  their  profession  of  the  faith  of  Nicaea.^ 

He  appears  to  have  acted  energetically  during  his 
short  reign,  in  destroying  heathen  temples,  and  in 
building  Christian  churches.^ 

The  time  had  arrived  when  Athanasius,  now  in  the 
thirty-seventh  year  of  his  Episcopate,  having  been 
banished  by  three  Emperors  in  succession — Constan- 
tine,  Constantius,  and  Julian — was  to  receive  from  a 
fourth,  Jovian,  the  tribute  due  to  his  innocence  and 
constancy  in  the  faith. 

Jovian  wrote  to  him  as  follows  : — 

*  Theofloret,  iv.  2. 

7  In  the  summer  of  1832,  I  copied  the  following  Inscription,  which 
is  engraved  over  the  portal  of  the  Church  of  S.  Mary  in  the  Pal^opolis 
of  Corfu  (the  ancient  Corcyra),  in  which  Jovian  speaks  of  his  own 
activity  in  these  respects,  and  which  is  also  an  interesting  utterance  of 
reverent  modesty  and  humility.  The  Inscription  is  in  the  character  of 
the  uncial  Manuscripts  of  that  period  ;  but  for  the  convenience  of  the 
printer  and  reader  I  will  represent  it  in  cursive  letters  : — 

oi/TTj  TTwArj  Kupioy,  Uk^oi  {sic  pro  SiKaioi)  elaeXivaoi^re  {sic)  eV  avT^, 
irlaTiu  exoov  ^aaiKiav  (sic)  i/xuv  jxeviwv  crvvipiQoVy 
2j),  fxaKap  "T\pifj.e5ov,  t6u5^  Uphv  ^KTiaa  vtjoi', 

X(:iphs  an*  oi/T.Sai'Tjs  'lo^iavhs  ^Svou  (qu.  eeSi'oi'?)''AvaKTi. 
The  first  two  and  last  lines  do  credit  to  the  Emperor's  piety  and 
humility.     I  suggest  eeSt'ov  m  the  last,  for  the  metre's  sake. 


190  /avian's  letter  to  Athanasiiis — Reply  of  Atha?iasius. 

"Jovian'  to  the  most  religious,  beloved  of  God, 
Athanasius. 

"Admiring  the  virtuous  qualities  of  thy  life,  and 
of  thy  resemblance  to  the  God  of  the  Universe,  and 
of  thy  affection  to  our  Saviour  Christ,  we  welcome 
thee,  O  most  honoured  Bishop.  And  because  after 
all  thy  toil,  and  the  terror  of  thy  persecutors,  thou 
didst  not  crouch  in  fear,  and  hast  counted  as  dung  the 
perils  and  menaces  of  the  sword,  and  because  holding 
fast  the  helm  of  the  orthodox  faith  dear  to  thee, 
even  to  this  present  day  thou  strivest  for  the  truth, 
and  continuest  to  show  thyself  a  pattern  to  the 
whole  people  of  the  faithful,  and  a  model  of  virtue  ; 
therefore  our  royal  authority  recalls  thee,  and  wills 
thee  to  return  for  the  teaching  of  salvation.  Come 
back,  therefore,  to  the  holy  Churches,  and  feed  the 
people  of  God,  and  send  forth  from  thy  heart  prayers  to 
God  for  our  clemency ;  for  we  know  that  through  thy 
supplication  we,  and  all  with  us  who  are  Christians, 
shall  receive  powerful  assistance  from  the  Almighty 
Gcd." 

Jovian  also  desired  Athanasius  to  send  him  a  de- 
claration of  the  true  Catholic  Faith.  To  this  request 
Athanasius,  with  the  Synod  assembled  by  him  at 
Alexandria,  made  the  following  reply  :  ^ — 

"To  the  most  religious  and  gracious  Emperor, 
Jovian,  Augustus,  Conqueror,  Athanasius  and  the 
rest  of  the  Bishops  who  have  come  together  to 
represent  all  the  Bishops  of  Egypt,  the  Thebaid,  and 
Libya. 

8  Athanas.  p.  622,  ed.  Bened.  In  the  superscription  Jovian  does 
not  assume  the  titles  "  Victor,  invictus,  Augustus,"  but  calls  himself 
simply  Jovian.     Another  sign  of  his  modesty. 

^  Ibid.     Theodoret,  iv.  3. 


Epistle  oj  Athanasms  to  Jovian  on  tJie  true  faith.      191 

"  It  well  becomes  a  Prince  dear  to  God  to  love  in- 
struction, and  to  desire  heavenly  things.  Thus  thou 
wilt  truly  have  thy  heart  in  the  hand  of  God.  Since 
therefore  thy  Piety  wishes  to  know  from  us  the  faith 
of  the  Catholic  Church,  we  give  thanks  for  this  to  the 
Lord,  and  we  have  resolved,  after  deliberation,  in  pre- 
ference to  all  other  things,  to  remind  thee  of  the 
faith  professed  by  the  Fathers  at  Nicaea.  Some 
persons,  having  neglected  this  faith,  have  conspired  in 
various  ways  against  us,  because  we  did  not  assent  to 
the  Arian  heresy  ;  and  they  have  become  guilty  of 
heresy  and  schisms  against  the  Catholic  Church. 
The  true  and  religious  faith  in  the  Lord  is  manifest 
to  all,  being  known  and  acknowledged  from  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  To  this  faith  the  Saints,  being  perfected, 
have  borne  witness ;  who,  having  been  now  released 
from  the  burden  of  the  flesh,  are  with  the  Lord. 
This  faith  would  have  remained  unimpaired,  if  the 
wickedness  of  some  heretics  had  not  presumed  to 
tamper  with  it.  Arius  and  they  who  were  with  him 
endeavoured  to  corrupt  it,  and  to  intrude  their  impiety 
against  it,  affirming  that  the  Son  of  God  was  formed 
from  things  that  did  not  before  exist,  and  that  He  is  a 
Creature,  and  was  made,  and  is  subject  to  change.  They 
deceived  many  with  their  words,  so  that  even  those 
who  'seemed  to  be  somewhat^  were  carried  away  to- 
gether with  them '  by  their  blasphemy,  albeit  the  holy 
Fathers  who  were  assembled  in  the  Council  of  Nicaea 
as  aforesaid  anathematized  it,  and  set  down  in 
writing  the  faith  of  the  Catholic  Church,  and  con- 
fessed it;  so  that,  this  faith  having  been  proclaimed 
everywhere,  the  heresy  kindled  by  the  heretics  was 
quenched. 

1  Gal.  ii.  6. 


192   Athanasius  sets  doivn  the  Nicene  Creed  as  containing 
the  faith  of  the  Chuixh. 

"  But  since  certain  persons,  wishing  to  renew 
the  Arian  heresy,  have  now  presumed  to  reject  the 
faith  confessed  by  the  Fathers  at  Nicaea,  and  not- 
withstanding pretend  to  acknowledge  that  faith, 
while  in  fact  they  deny  it  by  misinterpreting  the 
word  homoousion  ;  and  also  utter  blasphemy  against 
the  Holy  Spirit,  by  saying  that  He  is  a  creature,  and 
was  made  by  the  Son;  and  since  we  are  constrained  to 
consider  the  damage  done  to  our  people  by  this  kind 
of  blasphemy,  we  have  hastened  to  present  to  thy 
Piety  the  faith  confessed  at  Nicaea,  that  thou  mayest 
know  what  is  written  there  with  all  accuracy,  and  in 
what  error  they  are,  whose  teaching  is  contrary  to  it. 
Know  therefore,  most  religious  Emperor,  that  this 
faith  hath  been  alway  preached  ;  and  that  the  Fathers 
at  Nicsea  professed  it,  and  that  all  Churches  every- 
where communicate  in  it,  namely,  the  Churches  in 
Spain,  Britain,  Gaul,  all  Italy,  Dalmatia,  Dacia, 
Moesia,  Macedonia,  Greece  and  all  Africa,  and 
Sardinia,  Cyprus,  Crete,  Pamphylia,  Lycia,  Isauria 
and  Egypt,  the  Libyas  and  Pontus  and  Cappadocia, 
and  those  Churches  which  are  near  us,  and  the 
Churches  of  the  East,  except  a  few  which  agree  with 
Arius.  We  have  letters  from  these  Churches  assur- 
incf  us  of  this  fact" 

Athanasius  then  sets  down  the  Nicene  Creed,  and 
after  it  he  adds,— 

"  In  this  faith,  O  Emperor,  it  is  necessary  that  all 
men  should  abide,  being,  as  it  is,  divine  and  Apostolic  ; 
and  no  one  should  tamper  with  it  by  fair  speeches 
and  strivings  of  words,  as  the  Arians  have  done,  affirm- 
ing the  Son  to  be  formed  of  things  that  did  not 
before  exist,  and  that  there  was  a  time  when  He  did 
not  exist,  and  that  He  was  created  and  made,  and  is 


Disruption  of  Ariajiism,  193 

changeable.  For  this  cause  the  Council  of  Nicaea 
anathematized  such  a  heresy  as  that,  and  professed 
the  true  faith ;  for  they  did  not  merely  say  that  the 
Son  is  like  the  Father,  lest  the  Son  should  be  thought 
to  be  only  like  to  God,  but  they  set  down  in  writing 
the  word  homooicsios  [constibstantial),  which  is  the 
special  characteristic  of  a  genuine  and  true  Son  of 
Him  Who  is  a  true  Father,  and  such  by  nature.  Nor 
did  they  separate  the  Holy  Spirit  from  the  Father 
and  from  the  Son,  but  on  the  contrary  they  glorified 
the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  one  faith  of  the  Holy  Trinity, 
because  in  the  Holy  Trinity  there  is  One  Godhead." 

Such  was  the  Synodical  Epistle  of  Athanasius  and 
his  Suffragans  to  the  Emperor  Jovian. 

In  the  mean  while,  however,  a  Council  of  twenty- 
seven  Bishops  met  at  Antioch,^  under  the  presidency  of 
the  venerable  Meletius.  Even  Acacius  of  Caesarea  was 
there.  They  too  addressed  a  Synodical  letter  to 
Jovian,  in  which  they  professed  to  adhere  to  the  faith 
of  Nicaea,^  but  explained  it  in  a  way  so  as  to  admit 
those  who  acknowledge  the  Son  to  be  like  in  substance 
to  the  Father.     They  condemned  also  \\iQA7ioinceans.^ 

The  Anomoean  party  was  broken  at  this  time  by 
intestine  feuds.  Aetius  and  his  disciple  Eunomius  at 
Constantinople  took  upon  themselves  to  consecrate 
some  new  Bishops,  in  order  to  strengthen  their  party ; 
but  this  gave  great  offence  to  Eudoxius,  Bishop  ot 
Constantinople,  who  in  his  turn  was  treated  in- 
dignantly by  Euzoius  of  Antioch,  another  leader  of 
the  same  sect.  Thus  they  gave  practical  proof,  that 
if  the  Nicene  faith  had  been  abandoned  for  any  of  the 
numerous   Arianizing   Confessions   which  were    pro- 

2  Sozom.  vi.  4.  '  Socr.  iii.  25. 

"*  I.  e.  those  who  said  that  the  Son  was  unlike  the  Father. 
VOL.   II.  O 


194  Jovian! s  replies  to  Arians. 

pounded  for  it,  the  Church  would  have  been  distracted 
by  schism  as  well  as  corrupted  by  heresy. 

Jovian  was  not  drawn  aside  from  his  straightfor- 
ward course  by  any  of  these  conflicting  parties.  He 
graciously  received  the  Synodical  Epistle  from  Alex- 
andria, and  invited  Athanasius  to  Antioch.^  In  his 
replies  to  certain  Addresses  he  received  at  Antioch 
from  Arians,^  who  requested  him  to  send  another 
Bishop  to  Alexandria,  he  declared  his  assent  to  the 
Epistle  of  Athanasius.  "  I  have  already  settled  that 
business,"  he  said.  "  I  know  well  why  Athanasius  was 
accused  and  banished ;  I  have  inquired  diligently  into 
the  whole  affair,  and  am  convinced  that  he  teaches 
the  true  faith  ;  and  whoever  wishes  to  know  what 
the  faith  is,  let  him  go  and  learn  it  from  him.  You 
say  he  calls  you  heretics  ;  yes,  and  it  is  his  duty  to 
do  so  ;  it  is  the  duty  of  all  who  teach  the  truth  to 
denounce  heresy." 

One  of  those  Addresses  to  Jovian  was  presented  by 
friends  and  followers  of  George  of  Cappadocia,  the 
deceased  intruder  into  the  See  of  Athanasius.  When 
the  Emperor  had  received  the  Addresses,  and  had 
learnt  who  they  were  that  presented  them,  he  "clapped 
spurs  to  his  horse,  and  galloped  off  to  the  plain,"  ^ 

Lucius  also  presented  himself;  he  was  the  priest 
of  Alexandria  whom  the  Arians  had  intruded  into  the 
See  of  Alexandria  on  the  death  of  George  of  Cappa- 
docia.^ When  the  Emperor  had  heard  his  name,  and 
had  learnt  that  he  had  come  by  sea,  he  exclaimed, 

*  Sozomen,  vi.  5,  leaves  it  doubtful  whether  Athanasius  went  to 
Antioch  of  his  own  accord  to  see  Jovian,  or  was  invited  by  him. 

6  Ibid.  pp.  624,  625. 

7  P.  624.     "  The  plain  "  used  for  military  reviews  and  exercises. 

*  And  whom  they  afterwards  attempted  to  intmde  into  tliat  see  on  the 
death  of  Athanasius,  A.D.  373. 


Jovian' s  character.  195 

"May  the  Lord  of  the  Universe  and  the  Sun  and 
Moon  wreak  their  anger  on  those  who  sailed  with 
thee,  for  not  throwing  thee  overboard  ;  and  may  the 
ship  in  which  thou  earnest  never  have  prosperous 
winds,  and  never  come  safe  to  port." 

These  specimens  of  Jovian's  character  and  manner 
are  graphically  sketched  in  the  narratives  of  those 
interviews  ;  and  we  have  also  a  vivid  portraiture  of  his 
person.  In  stature  he  was  so  tall  and  large  that  no 
purple  robe  ^  of  sufficient  amplitude  could  be  found 
to  cover  it  when  he  was  chosen  Emperor.  His  jovial 
countenance,  bright  blue  eyes,  bluff  manner,  blunt 
questions  and  brusque  answers,  his  love  of  truth, 
his  brave  ^  and  outspoken  profession  of  the  Christian 
faith,  and  his  loyal  vindication  of  Athanasius,  make 
us  more  familiar  with  this  royal  soldier  than  we  are 
with  some  princes  whose  reign  was  of  much  longer 
duration.  His  vices  were  of  such  a  kind  that,  accord- 
ing to  Ammianus  (who  was  not  prepossessed  in  his 
favour),  he  would  probably  have  corrected  them  when 
in  the  responsible  station  of  Emperor.^  Allowances 
were  also  to  be  made  for  his  profession  and  his  youth. 
He  was  not  much  more  than  thirty-one  years  old  when 
he  succeeded  Julian ;  and  the  Roman  Camp  was  not  a 
school  of  moral  virtues.  But  it  pleased  God  to  limit 
his  reign  to  eight  months.  He  quitted  Antioch  in  the 
winter  of  A.D.  363  on  his  way  to  Constantinople,  and 
was   at  Ancyra   in    Galatia   on  Jan.   i,  364,  and  on 

^  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxv.  10,  "Incedebat  motu  corporis  gravi, 
vultu  Isetissimo,  oculis  caesiis,  vasta  proceritate  et  ardua,  adeo  ut  diu 
nullum  indumentum  regium  ad  mensuram  ejus  aptum  inveniretur." 

^  Even  by  the  heathen  historian  (Ammian.  Marcellin,  ibid.)  he  is 
called  "  Christianse  legis  studiosus  ;"  the  Church  historians  are  elo- 
quent in  his  praises. 

2  *'  Imperial!  forsitan  verecundia  correxisset." 
O   2 


196  Jovian' s  death.      Council  of  Laodicea. 

Feb.  17  he  reached  Dadastana,  on  the  confines  of 
Galatia  and  BIthynia.  The  season  was  cold,  the 
chamber  in  which  he  slept,  and  which  had  been  newly 
plastered,  was  damp,  and  was  heated  with  charcoal  ; 
he  suffered  from  repletion  and  suffocation,  and  died 
that  night  in  the  thirty-third  year  of  his  age/" 

The  Church  seems  to  have  taken  advantage  of  the 
respite  afforded  by  the  death  of  Julian  and  succession 
of  Jovian,  for  holding  synodical  assemblies.  The 
most  celebrated  of  these  was  the  Council  of  Laodicea, 
which  is  supposed  to  have  been  held  in  or  about  the 
year  363.* 

The   decrees   of  this   Council   are,   like    those   of 

^  Sozom.  vi.  6. 

■*  It  must  certainly  have  been  posterior  to  a.d.  344,  because  the 
7th  Canon  of  it  refers  to  the  Photinians,  whose  baptism  it  rejects,  and 
who  were  not  condemned  till  a.d.  344  by  the  Eusebians,  and  till 
A.D.  345  by  the  orthodox.  See  Hefele,  p.  747.  They  were  condemned 
again  at  Sirmium  in  351,  and  at  Milan,  A.D.  355,  and  Photinus  died  in 
exile,  A.D.  366.  The  ground  of  the  supposition  that  the  Council  of 
Laodicea  was  held  in  a.d.  363,  is  that  Gratian  says  (Decret.  Pars  i. 
Dist.  xvi.  c.  11),"  Synodus  sexta  Laodicensis,  in  qua  patres  xxxii.  sta- 
tuerunt  Canones  LXI.,  quorum  auctor  maxime  Theodosius  Episcopus 
extitit ;"  and  a  Theodosius  was  Bishop  of  Philadelphia  in  Lydia  at  that 
time,  and  held  a  Synod  there.  Philostorg.  viii.  3,  4,  p.  521,  ed.  Vales. 
Epiphan.  Hcer.  Ixxiii.  This  opinion  has  been  propounded  by  Gotho- 
fridus  and  Philostorg.  (1.  c),  and  Pagi,  Crit.  Ann.  314,  No.  25,  and  by 
Gieseler,  p.  347,  and  by  Professor  Westcott  on  the  Canon,  p.  497  (ed. 
1855).  It  is  disputed  by  Hefele,  Concilien-Geschichte,  i.  748,  who 
however  allows  that  this  Synod  was  held  after  A.  D.  344,  and  before 
A.d.  381. 

If  the  Theodosius  mentioned  by  Gratian  as  taking  the  lead  in  the 
Laodicene  Council  was — as  seems  probable — the  same  as  the  Theo- 
dosius the  Eunomian  Bishop  mentioned  by  Philostorgius  (the  Arian 
Church-historian),  then  the  Laodicene  Council  was  under  Arian 
influence,  as  was  the  Council  of  Antioch  in  A.D.  341  (see  above,  p.  81). 
This  circumstance  is  interesting  as  showing  that  there  were  many  good 
points  in  the  characters  of  many  Arian  Bishops — especially  reverence 
for  Holy  Scripture  (see  above,  p.  37).  The  Canons  of  Antioch  (not- 
withstanding its  Eusebian  character)  were  received  into  the  Code  of 
the  Church  ;  so  were  the  decree*  of  Laodicea,  being,  like  them, 
disciplinarian. 


Canons  of  Laodicea.  197 

Gangra,^  of  a  disciplinarian  character;  and  with  the 
exception  of  the  last  are  rather  titles  of  canons,  and 
descriptiveof  their  purport,  than  canonical  enactments.^ 

They  are  of  considerable  interest,  as  illustrating 
the  Ritual  as  well  as  the  Discipline  of  the  Church. 

The  Council  forbids  the  ordination  of  newly-bap- 
tized persons  (Can.  3),  and  it  prohibits  Ordination  to 
be  solemnized  in  the  presence  of  those  who  were  only 
under  catechetical  instruction  (Can.  5).  It  does  not 
permit  the  people  {^6y\ov<^^  to  elect  their  priests  (Can. 
13),  and  it  orders  that  Bishops  shall  be  chosen  by  the 
Metropolitan  and  neighbouring  Bishop  (Can.  12). 

It  forbids  the  placing  of  Bishops  in  villages,^  and 
allows  only  itinerating  visitors  (TrepioSeura?)  in  such 
places ;  and  orders  that  the  Chorepiscopi  (country 
bishops)  shall  do  nothing  without  the  consent  of  the 
Bishop  in  the  Cathedral  City  ;  and  that  Priests  shall 
do  nothing  without  the  authority  of  the  Bishop 
(Can.  57).  It  specifies — besides  priests  and  deacons 
— readers,  chanters,  exorcists  (Can.  24),  sub-deacons 
(Can.  21).  It  forbids  the  clergy  to  travel  without 
canonical  letters  (Can.  40).  Canon  11  forbids  the 
appointment  of  preshyteresses  {irpea^vriSe^)  or  female 
presidents  (c.  Epiphan.  Hseres.  79  ;  Hefele,  p.  757)- 

With  regard  to  the  divine  service  of  the  Church,  the 
Council  orders  that,  after  the  Sermon  of  the  Bishop, 
Prayers  for  the  catechumens  shall  be  said  ;  and  that 
when  the  catechumens  have  quitted  the  Church,  the 
Prayers  for  the  penitents  shall  follow  ;  and  that  when 

5  See  below,  p.  243. 

6  The  decrees  of  this  Council  are  in  Concil.  General,  i.  1495  ;  Bruns, 
i.  73  ;  Beveridge,  Synod,  p.  553,  with  the  notes  of  Balsamon  and  Zonaras. 

7  Cp.  Cone.  Antioch.  c.  13  ;  Cone.  Ancyr.  c.  13  ;  Cone.  Sard.  c.  6. 
The  xwpeTn'o-KOTToi  appear  generally  to  have  had  the  order  of  Bishops  (see 
Binterim,  and  Augusti,  in  Hefele,  p.  774),  but  not  \\i^  jurisdiction.  But 
some  had  not  the  order,  and  could  not  ordain.    Thomassin  (ibid.  p.  774). 


198  Cano7is  of  Laodicea  on  Ritual. 

they  have  come  near  and  received  imposition  of  hands, 
and  have  retired,  then  the  Prayers  of  the  faithful  shall 
succeed  ;  which  are  to  be  three  :  the  first  silent  prayer, 
the  second  and  third  vivct  voce ;  then  "  the  peace  " 
shall  be  given  (i.  e.  the  "  kiss  of  peace,"  Suicer,  Lex. 
p.  1033  5  cp.  Bingham,  Antiq.  xv.  chaps,  i  and  3).  First 
the  Priests  shall  give  the  "  peace  '^  to  the  Bishop,  then 
the  Laity  shall  give  *^  the  peace  ;"  then  the  holy  obla- 
tion shall  be  celebrated,  and  the  Priests  only  shall 
go  to  the  altar  {OvaLaarrjpLov)  and  communicate 
there  (Can.  19).  The  Priests  may  not  enter  and  take 
their  seats  in  the  sanctuary  (j3r}/jLa)  before  the  entrance 
of  the  Bishop,  unless  he  is  disabled  from  attending, 
or  absent  from  home  (Can.  56).  The  sub-deacons  may 
not  sit  in  the  presence  of  the  priest,  except  by  invita- 
tion of  the  priest ;  and  the  deacon  is  to  be  honoured 
by  the  sub-deacons  and  clerks  (Can.  20).  Sub-deacons, 
readers,  and  chanters  may  not  wear  the  orarutm  or 
stole,^  or,  (as  some  say,)  maniple  (Can.  22  and  23) .  None 
may  exorcise  without  the  Bishop's  leave  (Can.  26). 

The  Council  forbids  the  sending  of  eulogies-  or  con- 
secrated ^  elements  at  Easter  to  other  Dioceses  (Can. 
14).  Clerks  or  laymen,  invited  to  agapcB  (love- 
feasts)  may  not  take  away  any  portions  of  the  feast 
(Can.  27) .  Love-feasts  are  not  to  be  holden  in  Churches 
{icvpiaKa),  and  tables  for  eating,  and  for  reclining  at, 
are  not  to  be  spread  in  the  house  of  God. 

Neither  Bisliops  nor  Priests  are  to  celebrate  the 
holy  oblation  in  private  houses  (Can.  58). 

Canons  49,  50,  51,  52  deal  with  the  times  and 
manner  of  fasting,  especially  in  Lent. 

Canons  45,  46,  47  refer  to  the  Sacrament  of 
Baptism,  and  the  learning  of  the  Creed  by  heart. 

«  Hefele,  p.  765.  9  Cp.  ibid.  p.  760. 


Canons  on  baptism — oti  heresy — Angel-worship — sorcery,  199 

After  baptism,  baptized  persons  ought  to  receive 
the  holy  unction  {^iguol  i7rovpdviov)y  and  be  made 
partakers  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  (Can.  48). 

Canon  2  refers  to  the  reception  of  penitents  to 
Communion.  Heretics,  as  long  as  they  persist  in 
heresy,  are  not  to  be  admitted  to  the  Church  (Can.  6) ; 
and  the  faithful  ought  not  to  resort  to  the  churches 
or  cemeteries  of  heretics  for  prayer,  on  pain  of  excom- 
munication (Can.  9  and  32). 

Novatians  and  Quartodecimans  may  be  received 
to  communion  on  their  repentance  and  abjuration  of 
heresy,  when  they  have  learnt  the  symbol  of  faith  (the 
Creed),  and  have  received  the  holy  unction  (Can.  7). 
But  Montanists  (Phrygians),  although  they  may  be 
clerks,  must  be  instructed  first,  and  then  be  baptized 
by  Priests  or  Bishops  of  the  Church  (Can.  8). 

Christians  must  not  quit  the  Church  of  God,  and  go 
and  invoke  Angels,  and  make  unlawful  assemblies  ; 
and  if  any  one  is  discovered  to  be  addicted  to  this 
secret  idolatry,  let  him  be  anathema,  as  having  for- 
saken our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God  (Can.  35). 

The  Church-historian  Theodoret,  Bishop  of  Cyrus 
in  the  fifth  century  (in  his  note  on  Col.  ii.  18,  ibid.  iii. 
17),  quotes  this  Canon  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea  as 
forbidding  the  worship  of  Angels,  and  relates  that 
oratories  of  S.  Michael  still  existed  in  Phrygia  in  his 
day. 

The  Council  forbids  priests  and  clerks  to  practise 
magic  and  sorcery  and  astrology,  or  to  make  amulets 
and  charms  {(pvXaKTijpLo)  (Can.  36). 

Canons  37,  38,  39  interdict  all  fellowship  with  Jews 
or  Heathens  in  religious  ceremonies  (cp.  Can.  29). 
With  regard  to  the  sacred  Books  to  be  used  in  the 
public   worship    of  the   Church,   the   Council  made 


200  Decrees  on  Psalmody — ojt  Lessons  of  Scripture — Canon 

of  Scripture. 
these  enactments  :  "  No  one  is  allowed  to  lead  the 
singing^  in  the  Church,  except  the  'canonical  chanters, 
who  are  allowed  to  ascend  into  the  ambon  (pulpitum), 
and  who  sing  from  the  Church  music-books  {SccpOepai, 
vellum  chant-books)  (Can.  15).  Psalms  are  not  to 
be  sung  continuously,  but  with  intervals  between 
each  for  reading  (of  Scripture)  (Can.  17).  On  Satur- 
days the  Gospels  ^  are  to  be  read  together  with  other 
Scriptures  (Can.  16).  The  same  office  of  prayers  is 
to  be  used  at  Nones ^  and  Vespers"  (Can.  18). 

The  last  two  Canons  (Can.  59  and  60)  deal  with 
Psalmody  and  Holy  Scripture  :  "  No  Psalms  oi private 
introduction  (l8i(OTLKol,  i.  e.  not  publicly  authorized) 
are  to  be  used  in  the  Church,  nor  uncanonical  books, 
but  only  the  Canonical  Books  of  the  New  and  Old 
Testament"  (Can.  59). 

The  60th  Canon  specifies  Rooks  of  Scripture. 
These  are  the  same  as  those  specified  in  the  Sixth 
Article  of  the  Church  of  England — with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  Book  of  Revelation,  which  the  Laodicene 
Canon  omits.*  This  omission  of  the  Apocalypse  does 
not  affect  its  Canonical  authority,  because  the  Canon 
does  not  profess  to  declare  w/iat  books  are  Canonical^ 

1  See  Hefele,  p.  761.     Cp.  Neander,  iii.  428. 

2  Perhaps  Judaizers used  to  readonly  the  O/a' Testament  on  Saturday, 
the  Jewish  Sabbath.  Saturday  was  a  festival  in  the  East ;  a  fast,  at 
Rome.     Neander,  iii.  402. 

3  I.  e.  the  festivals  were  not  to  end  at  Nones,  but  to  be  continued  till 
Vespers  inclusively. 

4  The  genuineness  of  this  60th  Canon  has  been  questioned  by  some, 
as  Spittler  on  this  Canon,  a.d.  1777  ;  Professor  Westcott  on  the  Canon, 
pp.  500 — 508  ;  also  by  Fuchs  and  Herbst.  See  Hefele,  Concilien- 
Geschichte,  i.  p.  776,  who  accepts  it  as  genuine  ;  and  so  Bp.  Cosin, 
p.  76,  ed.  Oxf  1849,  and  Mr.  Ffoulkes  in  Archdeacon  Cheetham's  Diet, 
[ii.  p,  529.  The  list  here  given  is  confirmed  by  S.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem, 
Catech.  iv.  §  35,  §  36,  p.  69,  ed.  Venet.  1763,  and  others,  see  below, 
p.  202.     Cp.  Bp.  Cosin  on  the  Canon,  p.  64,  Oxf.  1849. 


On  the  Canon  of  Scripture— the  Old  Testament.     201 

but  what  books  are  to  be  publicly  read  in  the  Church  ; 
and  the  Council  may  have  deemed  it  inexpedient  that 
the  Apocalypse  should  be  publicly  read,  on  account  of 
the  mysterious  character  of  its  contents,  and  because 
some,  in  their  opposition  to  millenarian  notions, 
ascribed  it  to  Cerinthus.^  Perhaps  also  the  unfavour- 
able description  given  of  the  Church  of  Laodicea  in 
the  Apocalypse  (Rev.  iii.  14)  may  have  created  some 
prejudice  against  it  there. 

The  Books  of  Holy  Scripture  (says  Athanasius  in 
his  39th  Festal  Epistle  ^)  are  the  "  fountains  of  salva- 
tion ;"  and  before  we  quit  this  decree  of  Laodicea, 
it  may  be  well  to  dwell  a  little  longer  on  the  ques- 
tions, "  How  did  the  ancient  Church  determine 
what  books  are  divinely-inspired  Scripture  ?  and  what 
are  the  books  which  she  pronounced  to  be  such  ?  in 
other  words.  What  was  her  '  Canon  of  Scripture '  f  " 

As  to  the  Old  Testament,  she  grounded  her  judg- 
ment on  the  principle  enunciated  by  St.  Paul,''' that  to 
the  Jews  were  committed  the  oracles  of  God,  and 
that  what  they  received  as  Scripture  is  Scripture. 
And  this  principle  was  established  by  the  fact  that 
our  Blessed  Lord,  who  is  *  God  manifest  in  the  flesh,'  ^ 
and  as  God  has  perfect  knowledge,  did  in  the  days  of 
His  earthly  ministry  communicate  with  the  Jews  in 
their  Synagogues,  which  He  habitually  attended  on 
the  Sabbath  day,^  and  in  which  those  Books  which 
they  called  "the  Law  and  the  Prophets,"  and  which 
we  call  "  the  Old  Testament,"  were  publicly  received 
and  read  as  the  divinely -inspired  Word  of  God. 
Our  Lord  took  part  in  this  public  reading  ;  ^  and  He 
also  appealed  to  those  Books  as  the  inspired  Word 

5  As  may  be  seen  in  my  work  on  S.  Hippolytus,  p.  25,  note. 

^  Athan.  p.  767  ;  see  below,  p.  219.  "  Rom.  iii.  i,  2. 

8  I  Tim.  iii.  16.  3  Luke  iv.  14 — 17.  ^  Ibid. 


202  On  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testafttent. 

of  God  ;  as  for  example  in  His  Walk  to  Emmaus,  and 
in  His  appearance  to  His  Apostles,  on  the  day  of  His 
Resurrection  ;  ^  and  He  commands  all  men  to  receive 
them  as  divine.^  And  therefore  the  Apostle  St  Paul 
declares  that  every  Scripture — that  is,  every  book 
received  by  the  Jews  as  such — is  given  by  inspiration 
of  God.* 

Accordingly  we  find  that  the  earliest  Christian 
writers,  when  they  desired  to  ascertain  what  were  the 
divinely-inspired  writings  of  the  older  dispensation, 
resorted  for  information  to  the  Jews  in  Palestine. 
We  have  an  example  of  this  appeal  in  Melito,  Bishop 
of  Sardis,  in  the  second  century,  who  in  his  Epistle  to 
Onesimus,  preserved  by  Eusebius,^  states  that  he  had 
gone  to  the  East  for  this  purpose,  and  sets  down  as  the 
result  of  his  inquiries  a  catalogue  of  the  Books  of  the 
Old  Testament  This  contains  those  writings  which 
the  Jews  received  as  inspired,  and  which  were  from 
them  received  as  such  by  the  Ancient  Church. 

That  Catalogue  is  identical  with  the  list  of  Books 
of  the  Old  Testament  which  the  Church  of  England 
receives  in  her  Sixth  Article. 

This  list  is  the  same  as  that  which  is  specified  by 
Orlgen,^  Athanasius,^  S.  Cyril,  Bishop  of  Jerusalem,^ 
S.  Hilary,^  Rufinus,^  S.  Gregory  Nazianzen,^  who  has 
set  down  the  "  Canon  of  Scripture  "  in  hexameter, 
pentameter,  and  iambic  verses. 

Another  friend  of  S.  Basil,  Amphilochius,  Bishop 
of  Iconium  in  Lycaonia,  and  Metropolitan,  inserted  a 

2  Luke  xxiv.  27,  44.  ^  gee  John  x.  35  ;  Luke  xvi.  29 — 31. 

4  2  Tim.  iii.  15,  16.  *  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  iv.  26. 

6  Euseb.  vi.  25.  7  P.  767. 

8  S.  Cyril,  Catech.  iv.  c  3.  ^  S.  Hilar.  Prolog,  in  Psalm.  §  15. 

^  Rufin.  in  Symbol.  Apost.  p.  26. 

-  S.  Greg.  Naz.  Carm.  No.  xii.  tom.  ii.  p.  259. 


Ca7ionical  Books  ^  how  distinguished  from  Ecclesiastical  203 
and  Apocryphal. 

"  Canon  of  Scripture  "  in  an  Epistle  of  333  iambic  verses 
addressed  to  one  of  his  young  scholars,  Seleucus.^ 
From  these  various  documents  it  is  clear — 
(i)  That  the  Hebreiv  "  Canon  of  Scripture  "  was  the 
Canon  of  Scripture  of  the  CJiurch.  The  only  varia- 
tion seems  to  be  with  regard  to  the  Book  of  Esther, 
which  is  omitted  by  some ;  unless,  as  Bishop  Cosin  * 
supposes,  it  is  contained  in  the  word  Ezra,  as  being 
supposed  to  have  been  written  by  him. 

(2)  That  there  were  certain  Books  which  we  call 
*^  Apocryfhal,''  but  which  ought  to  be  called  Eccle- 
siastical, which  might  be  read  in  the  Church  {Ecclesia), 
but  were  not  held  to  be  divinely  inspired,  nor  properly 
within  the  "  Canon  of  Scripture,"  but  held  a  middle^ 
place  between  the  Canonical  Books  and  those  which 
the  Ancient  Church  called  Apocryphal,  and  which 
were  7iot  to  be  read  in  the  Church. 

2  This  Epistle  of  Amphilochius,  written  in  iambic  verse,  Paris,  1644, 
pp.    117— 135,   gives   an   interesting   picture   of  the  manners  of  the 
times,   especially  of  the   popular  vices  of  the   day,   and   deserves    a 
better   recension   than  it  has,  I  believe,  yet  received.     For  example, 
describing  the  character  of  the  effeminate  men  of  the  time,  Amphilochius 
says,  according  to    the    common  text   (z/.    91)    that  they  are    /ueAwj/ 
Ko'^ i(T\xo'is   avyKaraKKu)  PT€s  (pixriv,  where  we  ought,  I  conceive,  to 
read  \vy icrixo7s,  contoHions ;  compare  Horace,  3  Od.  vi.  22, 
"  Motus  doceri  gaudet  lonicos 
Matura  virgo  et79'a//^zVz^r  artubus  ;" 
and  Cicero  de  Fin.  v.   12,    '■^Jiexi,  fractique  gressus,"  which  Greg. 
Naz.  calls  av})p6'yvva  \vyi<T/ui.aTa. 
Again,  Amphilochius,  ibid.  z'.  260,  speaking  of  a/>ocryp/ial writings,  says, 
&  ^aaiKews  fikv  t^v  iTnypa(pr}V  (pepei, 
KtiSStjAa  8'  eVrl   ra7s   uAats    SoXov/xeva, 
which  can  neither  be  scanned  nor  construed  ;  and  where  I  conjecture  we 
should  read,  kj/SStjAo  S'  iarl,  KalavKus  SoXovfiei/a,  i.  e.  "  and  wickedly 
counterfeited."     Cp.  Homer,  atcrvKa  p4(wv,  Iliad  v.  403. 

*  Bishop  Cosin  on  the  Canon,  ed.  Oxf.  1849,  p.  59,  Num.  Ivi. 
^  They  are  elegantly  called  by  Amphilochius,  ibid.  v.  255, 
€  /jL/xea-  0  i  Kal  yeiroves, 
ws  &u  Tis  e^TTOi,  Ta>j/  aA7j9e/as  Aoyccu, 
and  are  distinguished  by  him  from  the  v6eoi  Kal  Kifidr]\oi, 


204  Canon  of  the  Neiv  Testament. 

As  to  the  New  Testament,  the  far  greater  propor- 
tion of  the  Books  of  it  were  received  at  once  by  the 
Church  Universal — as  soon  as  they  were  written — as 
divinely  inspired  and  Canonical.  For  a  time  there 
was  a  question  as  to  the  authorship  {not  the  canonicity) 
of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  because  it  had  not  St. 
Paul's  name  prefixed  to  it,  as  his  other  Epistles 
had,  and  because  it  differed  in  style  from  those 
Epistles.  But  in  the  fourth  century  the  Eastern 
Church,  and  after  it  the  Western  Church,  appear  to 
have  settled  down  unanimously  into  the  opinion  that 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  written  by  that  Apostle. 

The  second  Epistle  of  St.  Peter  differs  also  in  style 
from  the  first ;  and  though  St.  Peter's  name  is  prefixed 
to  it,  and  though,  by  a  personal  reference,  the  Author 
identifies^  himself  with  St.  Peter,  yet  the  Church  wisely 
thought  it  to  be  her  duty  to  wait,  till  she  was  satisfied 
of  its  genuineness  and  authority  by  careful  examination, 
before  admitting  it  into  the  Canon  :  which  at  length 
she  did  ;  and  her  prudent  delay  in  this  respect  gives 
greater  weight  to  her  judgment  on  the  subject. 

The  same  may  be  said  of  the  other  small  disputed 
portions  {avrike'yoiJieva  as  they  were  called)  of  the 
New  Testament^  viz.  the  Epistle  of  St.  James,  the 
2nd  and  3rd  Epistle  of  St.  John,  St.  Jude's  Epistle, 
and  the  Apocalypse.  These  books  were  not  at  once 
received  by  all  Churches,  nor  were  they  known  by 
all.  Some  Churches  had  better  opportunities  than 
others  of  examining  into  their  claims  to  reception. 
The  dissemination  of  forged  writings  made  it  necessary 
for  Churches  to  be  cautious ;  one  Church  after  an- 
other tested  these  books,  and  approved  them,  till  at 
length  they  were  received  by  all  Churches ;  and  this 
universal  receptio7i  of  these  Books,  together  with  the 

6  2  Pet.  i.  18,  and  2  Pet.  iii.  i. 


The  Judgment  of  the  Chujxh  Unive7'sal  is  the  Judgment  205 
of  Christ  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost —  Valentinian  Emperor. 
other  Canonical  Books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment, by  the  Church  of  God,  is  no  other  than  the 
Judgment  of  Christ  Himself,  the  Eternal  Word, 
dwelling  in  the  Church,  and  giving  her  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  "  teach  her  all  things,  and  to  lead  her  into 
all  truth." '  It  is  the  Voice  of  the  Eternal  Word 
concerning  the  Written  Word. 

But  to  resume  the  history.  After  the  death  of 
Jovian,  the  Army  on  its  arrival  at  Nicaea  in  Bithynia 
unanimously  chose  ^  Valentinian  to  succeed  Jovian. 
Valentinian  was  not  present  at  the  time ;  but  being 
invited  to  Nicsea  by  the  Army,  he  returned  from 
Melitina  in  Armenia,  to  which  he  had  been  banished 
by  Julian,  under  whom  he  had  served  as  a  tribune  of 
the  legion  of  Joviani.  When  Julian  was  in  Gaul, 
about  to  march  against  Constantius,  and  was  offering 
sacrifice  in  a  temple,  and  was  attended  as  usual  by 
the  tribunes  of  Jovians  (deriving  their  name  from 
Jupiter),  and  was  crossing  the  threshold,  some  drops 
of  the  lustral  water  sprinkled  by  the  priest  fell  on  the 
uniform  of  Valentinian  ;  he  tore  off  that  part  of  it,  and 
flung  it  away,  with  words  of  reproach  to  the  priest 
who  had  sprinkled  it.  From  that  time  Valentinian 
was  obnoxious  to  Julian,  who,  on  some  alleged 
failure  of  military  duty,  banished  him  to  Armenia. 

When  Valentinian  had  been  saluted  Emperor  by 
the  soldiers,  they  desired  him  with  importunate 
clamour  to  associate  with  himself  a  partner  in  the 

7  John  xiv,  26  ;  xvi.  13,  The  words  of  the  Church  of  England  in 
her  Sixth  Article,  referring  to  the  external  testhnony  of  the  Church 
Universal  on  this  subject,  are  full  of  wisdom,  as  distinguished  from  the 
language  of  some  Protestant  communions,  making  the  evidence  of 
Inspiration  to  depend  on  "the  reader's  inner  consciousness P 

^  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxvi.  I,  *'  Valentinianus,  nulla  discordante 
sententia,  numinis  aspiratione  ccelestis  electus  est." 


2o6  Valejitinian  associates  his  brother  Valens  in  the  Empire. 

Empire.  "  Comrades,"  he  replied,^  "  it  was  for  you  to 
choose  me  Emperor,  or  not ;  but  now  that  you  have 
chosen  me,  you  must  leave  that  matter  to  me."  How- 
ever, when  he  arrived  at  Constantinople  he  admitted 
his  brother  Valens  on  March  28  to  a  share  in  the 
Imperial  power,  reserving  the  West  to  himself,  and 
assigning  the  East  to  him.  "  Both  of  the  brothers," 
say  Sozomen,^  "  were  Christians,  but  differed  in 
opinion  and  in  manner  of  life.  Valens,  when  he  was 
baptized,^  was  trained  by  the  Arian  Bishop  Eudoxius,^ 
and  became  a  strenuous  partisan  of  Arianism,*  and 
endeavoured  to  enforce  it  upon  all.  His  elder  brother 
Valentinian  embraced  the  faith  of  Nicaea,  and  encou- 
raged all  who  professed  it,  but  did  not  molest  those 
who  dissented  from  it." 

The  two  brothers  went  together  to  Sirmium ;  thence 
Valentinian  proceeded  to  Milan,  where  he  arrived  on 
June  I,  364,  and  Valens  returned  to  Constantinople. 

In  the  year  364,  many  Laws  were  made  by  the  two 
Emperors  conjointly  in  favour  of  Christianity.^  The 
edicts  of  Julian  were  rescinded  which  prohibited 
Christians  from  teaching  in  Grammar  Schools.  Noc- 
turnal sacrifices  and  magical  ceremonies  were  inter- 
dicted.    No  Christian  was  to  be  required  to  serve  in 

5  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxvi.  2  and  4. 
^  Sozom.  vi.  6.     Theodoret,  iv.  12. 

2  Valens  was  not  baptized  till  A.D.  367,  when  he  was  going  to  march 
against  the  Goths.  Till  that  time  he  was  not  so  unfavourable  to  the 
Catholics.     Theodoret,  iv.  11, 12. 

3  Bishop  first  of  Germanicia,  then  of  Antioch,  in  A.D.  356,  and  lastly 
of  Constantinople,  A.D.  359.  He  died  at  Nicsea  in  A.D  370,  whither 
he  had  gone  to  consecrate  a  Bishop.  He  was  at  first  an  Arian,  then  he 
became  a  Semi- Arian,  and  then  an  Anomoean  and  Aetian  ;  but  finally 
he  opposed  Aetius. 

*  Especially  under  the  influence  of  his  wife  Albia  Dominica. 
Theodoret,  iv.  ii.  *  They  may  be  seen  in  Fleury,  iv.  138. 


Auxentiiis  Bishop  of  Milan  accused  of  heresy — is  207 
acquitted. 
the  police  or  army  for  the  protection  of  those  heathen 
temples  which  were  still  allowed  to  remain.  Certain 
Laws  were  enacted  by  Valentinian  in  honour  of  the 
Lord's  Day,  and  of  the  Festival  of  Easter  ;  on  the 
former  no  legal  proceedings  against  Christians  were 
to  be  instituted ;  and  on  the  latter,  release  was 
granted  to  prisoners  convicted  of  minor  offences. 

In  A.D.  364,  and  in  the  greater  part  of  365,  Valen- 
tinian was  at  Milan,  where  he  ordered  an  audience  to 
be  given  to  Auxentius  the  Arian  Bishop  in  a  plea 
against  two  celebrated  Catholic  Bishops,  S.  Hilary  of 
Poictiers  and  Eusebius  of  VerceJlae.  S.  Hilary  had 
endeavoured  to  eject  Auxentius  as  a  heretic  from  his 
see.  The  matter  was  referred  ^  by  the  Emperor  to 
an  Ecclesiastical  Court  of  Bishops  in  presence  of  the 
Imperial  Qusestor.  Auxentius,  after  some  demur, 
declared  that  he  believed  that  the  Son  of  God  was 
God  of  the  same  substance  with  the  Father.  But 
being  pressed  to  set  down  more  fully  in  writing  his 
faith,  he  did  so,  and  at  the  same  time  he  appealed 
to  the  Council  of  Rimini  as  authoritative,  and  to 
the  decree  by  which  Hilary  and  Eusebius  had  been 
condemned. 

S.  Hilary  in  his  work  still  extant  comments  on  that 
confession  of  faith  which  was  adopted  at  Rimini ;  it 
is  called  by  him  the  "  blasphemia  Auxentii,"  and  is 
altogether  at  variance  with  the  declaration  that  "  the 
Son  is  of  one  substance  with  the  Father."  But  Valen- 
tinian, like  Constantine,  was  a  lover  of  peace,  and 
allowed  himself  to  be  imposed  upon  by  plausible  spe- 
ciousness  of  verbal  utterances.  "  Auxentius,"  says 
Hilary ,7  "  deceived  the  Emperor  by  words  ;  and  by 
them  the  enemies  of  Christ  may  deceive  the  very  elect." 

«  S.  Hilar,  c.  Auxent.  pp.  597  —  602.  '  Ibid.  p.  598, 


2o8  Remonstrance  of  S.  Hilary, 

Valentlnian  received  Auxentlus  graciously,  and 
ordered  Hilary  to  quit  Milan.  Hilary  did  so, 
and  addressed  a  circular  Letter  with  this  title, 
"  To  our  most  dearly  beloved  brethren  the  Bishops, 
and  to  all  people  abiding  in  the  faith  of  our 
fathers,  and  detesting  the  Arian  heresy,  Hilary  their 
fellow-servant  wishes  everlasting  salvation  in  the 
Lord."     In  it  he  thus  speaks  :^ — 

"  Specious  indeed  is  the  name  of  Peace,  and 
beautiful  is  the  idea  of  Unity  ;  but  who  can  doubt 
that  the  only  Unity  of  the  Church  and  of  the  Gospel 
is  the  Peace  of  Christ }  This  is  the  Peace  which  He 
left  us  wh^n  He  was  going  to  the  Father  (John  xx. 
19)  ;  this  is  the  Peace,  most  dearly  beloved  brethren, 
which  we  ought  to  seek  when  lost,  and  which,  when 
disturbed,  we  ought'  to  compose,  and  which,  when 
found,  we  ought  to  hold  fast.  But  now  we  have  an 
Antichristian  Unity  forced  upon  us.  Strenuous 
endeavours  are  made  by  some  that  Christ  may  be 
denied  when  He  is  supposed  to  be  preached.  Men 
labour  to  maintain  the  cause  of  Christ  by  courting  the 
powers  of  the  World.  O  ye  Bishops,  I  ask  you  to 
consider  what  were  the  suffrages  which  the  Apostles 
asked  for  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  .'*  By  what  powers 
of  the  World  were  they  enabled  to  preach  Christ,  and 
to  win  the  Nations  from  idols  to  God  }  When  they 
sang  hymns  to  God  in  prison  and  in  bonds,  and  after 
scourgings  (Acts  xvi.  25),  did  they  invoke  the  aid  of 
an  officer  from  the  Palace  t  Did  Paul,  who  was  a 
spectacle  in  the  theatre,  ever  gather  together  a  Church 
by  means  of  an  Imperial  Edict  }  Did  he  ask  for  the 
patronage  of  a  Nero,  a  Vespasian,  or  a  Decius  ?  And 
yet  those  holy  men,  who  laboured  with  their  hands, 

^  S.  Hilar,  c.  Auxent.  p.  593. 


S.  Hilary's  remojistrance.  209 

and  met  in  secret  chambers  and  upper  rooms,  and 
traversed  towns,  villages,  and  countries   in  spite    of 
decrees  of  Senates,  and  edicts  of  Kings,  had  they  not 
the  keys  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  ?     And  did  not 
God  stretch  forth  His  Hand  to  help  them  by  order- 
ing the  things  of  this  world  in  such  wise  that  Christ 
was  more  fully  preached  in  proportion  as  the  preach- 
ing of  Christ  was  more  strictly  forbidden  ?     But  now, 
alas  !  earthly  suffrages  impose  divine  faith,  and  Christ 
is  convicted  of  weakness  by  the  canvassing  of  earthly 
patronage  in  behalf  of  His  Name.     Now  the  Church 
scares  men  by  exile  and  imprisonment,  and  forces 
them  to  believe  her  by  dint  of  banishment  and  bonds. 
She   who   was  consecrated  by  the  menaces    of  her 
persecutors,    now   hangs    a   suppliant    on    the    con- 
descension   of   those   who    communicate    with    her. 
She  who  was  propagated  by  the  banishment  of  her 
priests,   now  banishes   priests.     She  who   cannot  be 
Christ's,  except  the  World  hate  her,  now  boasts  that 
the  World  loves  her.     Such  is  now  the  condition  of  the 
Church   in  comparison  with  the  Church  which  was 
entrusted  to  our  keeping,  and  which  we  are  now  in 
danger  of  losing  by  reason  of  the  treachery  of  Bishops. 
But  thank  God  the  people  in   our  Churches  ^  believe 
what  they  hear.     They  hear  there  that  Christ  is  God, 
and  they  therefore   deem  Him  to  be   God.       They 
hear  there  that  He  is  the  Son  of  God,  and  they  be- 
lieve  His  Sonship  to   be  real.     They  hear  that  He 
existed  'before  all   worlds'  and  they    think  this  to 
mean  that  He  existed  always.     And   so  the  ears  of 
our  people  are  holier  than  the  hearts  of  our  Priests."  ^ 

9  The  conservative  virtue  of  the  Nicene  Creed,  sung  or  said  in 
Churches,  is  exemplified  by  this  assertion  of  S.  Hilary,  which  might  be 
also  applied  to  the  Athanasian  Creed.     See  Hooker,  V.  xlii.  6—13. 

1  "  Sanctiores  aures  plebis  quam  corda  sacerdotum,"  Hilar,  p.  597. 
VOL.    II.  P 


2  lo    S.  Hilary  against  Arianisi7i — ajid  a  secular  spirit  in 
the  Church, 

Hilary  then  inveighs  against  Auxentius,  whom 
Valentinian  had  maintained  in  the  See  of  Milan.  "  I 
will  not  preach  two  Gods  "  (says  Auxentius),  "  because 
there  are  not  two  Fathers.  Who  does  not  perceive 
that  according  to  Auxentius  the  Father  alone  is  to  be 
confessed  as  God  ?  But,  says  Auxentius,  '  the  Son  is 
like  the  Father  according  to  the  Scriptures.'  But  if 
the  Son  is  truly  God,  why  do  we  hear  of  His  mere 
likeness  to  God  1  True  ;  Christ  is  the  image  of  God. 
Yes,  but  Adam  also  was  created  in  God's  image  and 
likeness.  Why,  O  thou  heir  of  Arius,  dost  thou  con- 
cede to  Christ  only  what  belongs  to  us  men  }  Thou 
sayest  Christ  may  be  called  God.  Yes,  and  Moses  is 
called  a  God  to  Pharaoh  (Exod.  vii.  i).  Thou  callest 
Christ  God's  First-born  Son.  Yes,  and  Israel  is  His 
first-born  (Exod.  iv.  22,  23).  Thou  sayest  that  Christ 
was  born  before  all  time.  Yes,  and  the  Devil  also 
existed  before  the  world.  Thou  deniest  only  to  Christ 
that  which  is  His  proper  right,  namely,  to  be  true  God, 
and  of  one  substance  and  Godhead  with  the  Father." 

Hilary  also  exhorts  the  Bishops  not  to  dote  too 
much  on  secular  things.  "  One  thing  I  warn  you. 
Beware  of  Antichrist.  You  err  in  your  love  of  walls. 
You  err  in  your  veneration  for  the  Church  in  her  roofs 
and  masonry.  You  err  in  importing  into  such  things 
the  name  of  Peace.  Will  not  Antichrist  take  his 
seat  there  1  ^  Mountains,  Woods  and  Lakes,  Prisons 
and  Whirlpools — in  these  the  Prophets  dwelt  or  were 
plunged  ;  and  in  them  they  prophesied  by  the  Spirit 
of  God.^  Therefore  separate  yourselves  from  Auxen- 
tius, the  messenger  of  Satan,  the  enemy  of  Christ,  the 
desperate  destroyer  of  the  Faith  which  he  professed 
to  the  Emperor  in  order  to  deceive  him,  and  by  which 

2  In  the  Temple  of  God.  2  Thess.  ii.  4. 


Charade?-  and  writings  of  S.  Hi/ary.  2 1 1 

he  did  deceive  him,  in  order    that  he  might    blas- 
pheme." 

Such  is  the  language  of  S.  Hilary,  one  of  the  noblest 
of  the  Churches  Confessors,  who  saved  Gaul  *  from 
heresy,  especially  by  his  works  on  Synods  and  on  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  In  his  invective  just  cited 
against  the  Arian  Bishop  of  Milan,  Auxentius,  and  in 
his  philippics  against  the  Arian  Emperor  Constantius,^ 
he  flows  on  in  that  impetuous  torrent  of  impassioned 
rhetoric,  which  made  S.  Jerome  call  him  "  Latinse 
Eloquentiae  Rhodanum,"  ^  the  "  Rhone  of  Latin 
Eloquence."  To  the  candid  and  impartial  reader  it 
may  probably  appear  that  in  his  holy  zeal  against 
Arianism  he  was  betrayed  into  too  much  personal 
asperity  and  vehemence  against  its  partisans  ;  and 
that  his  just  indignation  against  those  who  sacrifice 
the  spiritual  essence  of  the  Church  of  Christ  to  her 
temporal  accidents,  and  his  enthusiastic  admiration  of 
Prophets  and  Apostles,  who  strove  for  the  truth  against 
the  world,  and  overcame  the  world  by  suffering, 
tempted  him  to  forget  that  they  had  special  gifts  of 
inspiration  and  miracles  which  were  not  continued  to 


*  Sulpic.  Sever,  ii.  I. 

^  Liber  "contra  Constantium  Imperatorem,*' written  a.d.  360,  and 
probably  published  after  the  Emperor's  death  ;  see  S.  Jerome,  Scr. 
Eccl.  c.  100,  compared  with  the  Benedictine  note  prefixed  to  Hilary's 
work,  p.  551.  In  that  work,  p.  575,  he  says,  "Constantius  res  blas- 
phemise  suae  metu  extorsit  exilii  .  .  .  nihil  prorsus  aliud  egit  quam  ut 
orbem  terrarum,  pro  quo  Christus  passus  est,  diabolo  condonaret." 
Athanasius,  who  first  wrote  a  respectful  Apology  to  Constantius  (i.  234), 
was  moved  afterwards  to  change  his  tone  in  his  history  of  the  Arians 
addressed  to  the  Monks,  A.D.  358  (i.  p.  272),  in  which  he  compared 
Constantius  to  Pharaoh,  Saul,  Pilate,  and  Antichrist,  pp.  303 — 307. 

^  S.  Jerome,  in  lib.  ii.  Comment,  ad  Galat.  p.  255  ;  and  S.  Jerome 
also  says  (Epist.  104,  ad  Paullin.),  "  Hilarius  Gallicano  cothurno 
attolHtur." 

P   2 


212       Benefits  rendered  to  the  Church  by  civil  Rulers. 

after-times  ;  and  that  God  has  declared  His  Will  in 
His  Word  that  Princes  should  be  nursing  fathers  of 
the  Church  (Isa.  xlix.  23).  S.  Hilary's  righteous 
wrath  against  the  abuses  of  temporal  power  in  Eccle- 
siastical affairs  by  arbitrary  Princes  had  made  him 
unable  to  recognize  the  benefits  which  the  Church  has 
received  from  God  by  means  of  some  of  His  earthly 
Vicegerents  ruling  according  to  His  Laws  and  for  the 
advancement  of  His  Glory.  Some  good  has  accrued 
to  her  not  only  from  the  favour  of  a  Constantine,  a 
Jovian^  and  a  Theodosius,  but  even  from  some  of  the 
laws  of  a  Constantius  and  a  Valens. 

It  is  worthy  also  of  remark,  that  Valentinian,  who 
was  deceived  by  the  Arian  Bishop  Auxentius  at 
Milan,  and  whose  act  in  that  respect  inflamed  Hilary's 
resentment  against  temporal  Powers,  was  made  instru- 
mental by  God's  providence  about  ten  years  afterwards 
in  giving  to  the  City  and  Church  of  Milan,  and  to  the 
Church  Catholic,  one  of  the  greatest  spiritual  blessings 
they  ever  enjoyed,  in  the  person  of  S.  Ambrose,  the 
noble  champion  of  orthodoxy  against  Arianism,  and 
the  brave  assertor  of  Church  discipline  against  the 
Emperor  of  the  world,  Theodosius. 

S.Hilary  returned  to  his  own  Episcopal  see,Poictiers, 
and  soon  afterwards  passed  away  in  a  holy  death  to 
the  land  of  peace  (a.d.  367) ;  to  which  he  was  soon 
afterwards  followed  by  his  dear  friend,  and  brother 
Bishop,  Eusebius  of  Vercellae. 

The  East  under  Valens  was  in  much  greater  danger 
from  Heresy  than  the  West  under  his  elder  brother 
Valentinian,  who  encouraged  the  orthodox,  while  he 
was  tolerant  of  those  who  dissented  from  them. 

On  Aug.  24,  A.D.  367,  Valentinian,  being  seized  with 
a  dangerous  malady,  declared  his  son  Gratian  Angus- 


Seini-Arian  Council  of  Lampsacus — Magicians.      213 

tus,  then  eight  years  of  age,  the  issue  of  his  marriage 
with  Severa,  whom,  to  the  great  injury  of  the  Western 
Church,  he  divorced,  in  order  to  marry  the  beautiful 
widow  of  the  tyrant  Magnentius,  Justina ;  she  be- 
came the  mother  of  Valentinian  the  younger,  whom 
she  induced  to  propagate  Arianism  and  to  persecute 
S.  Ambrose. 

In  A.D.  365,  a  Council  at  Lampsacus  on  the  Helles- 
pont put  forth  decrees  in  favour  of  Semi- Arianism^ 
and  condemned  equally  the  Homoousians  and  the 
AnomoeansJ  But  these  decrees,  so  far  as  the  Ano- 
moeans  were  concerned,  were  not  ratified  by  the 
Eastern  Emperor,  Valens,  who  was  prepossessed  in 
favour  of  Arianism  by  his  wife,  Albia  Dominica,  and 
by  the  influence  of  Eudoxius,  Bishop  of  Constan- 
tinople.^ 

In  A.D.  366,  Valens  quelled  the  insurrection  of  Pro- 
copius,  a  relative  of  Julian  and  an  aspirant  to  the 
throne,  and  condemned  him  to  death.  Some  years 
afterwards  he  punished  Maximus  the  philosopher 
and  magician,  who  had  perverted  Julian  from  the 
faith.  Maximus  had  escaped  the  Emperor's  hands 
till  A.D.  374,  when  Valens  discovered  that  some 
persons  were  resorting  to  magical  arts,  in  order 
to  ascertain  by  divination  who  would  succeed  him 
on  the  throne.  They  constructed,  we  are  told,^ 
a  tripod  of  laurel,  and  consecrated  it  with  magical  in- 
cantations ;  and  placed  it  in  the  middle  of  an  apartment 
fumigated  with  Arabian  odours,  and  set  it  on  a  stand, 
engraved  on  its  margin  with  the  twenty-four  letters 
of  the  Greek  alphabet.  A  Magician,  clothed  in  linen 
vestments,  and  wearing  linen  sandals,  and  having  a 

'  Sozom.  vi.  7.  8  ibi(j,     Theodoret,  iv.  11,  12. 

^  Socr.  iv.  19.     Sozom.  vi.  35, 


214     Response  of  the  magical  tripod  on  the  successor  of 

Valens — Se??ii-Arian  Appeal  to  the  West. 
laurel-branch  in  his  hand,  performed  certain  mystical 
charms,  and  shook  a  magical  ring  suspended  by  a 
thread  round  the  edge  of  the  stand,  and  dipping 
down  on  the  letters  of  the  margin,  and  by  means  of 
the  letters  on  which  it  dropped  in  its  rotatory  motion, 
he  spelt  out  an  oracular  answer  to  the  question  pro- 
posed. 

When  the  inquiry  was  made,  "  Who  would  succeed 
Valens  ? "  the  ring  indicated  certain  letters  in  this  order, 
OEOA  (THEOD).  These  letters  were  interpreted 
to  mean  that  some  one  whose  name  began  with  those 
two  syllables  would  be  the  Emperor's  successor.  The 
report  of  this  oracular  process  reached  the  ears  of 
Valens,  and  he  punished  those  who  were  concerned 
in  it.  Many  of  the  magicians  were  put  to  death. 
Maximus,  among  them,  was  beheaded.^  The  maker 
of  the  tripod,  Simonides,  was  burnt  alive.  A  noble- 
man, whose  name  was  Theodosius,  was  beheaded. 
Other  persons,  exposed  to  suspicion  by  those  initial 
syllables,  changed  their  names,  or  were  executed.^ 

Another  oracle  was  delivered  by  them  at  the  same 
time,  that  Valens  would  perish  by  fire.^ 

The  Emperor's  eager  partisanship  of  the  extreme 
form  of  Arianism,  under  the  influence  of  Eudoxius, 
had  the  good  effect  of  approximating  the  Semi- 
Arians  to  the  Homoousians.  Having  met  in  small 
Synods  at  Smyrna,  and  in  various  places  in  Pisidia, 
Isauria,  Pamphylia,  and  Lycia,  they  resolved  to 
imitate  Athanasius,  and  to  invoke  the  aid  of  the 
West.     They  sent  deputies  to  Pope  Liberius,*  who, 


1  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxix.  I.     Eunap.  Vit.  Maximi,  p.  104. 
•  Ibid.     Sozom.  vi.  35.      Socr.  iv.  19.     Philostorg.  ix.  19. 
3  Ibid.  xxix.  I,  and  xxx.  14.     See  below  at  the  end  of  Chapter  vii.  for 
the  sequel  of  this  strange  story.  ^  Socr.  iv.  12. 


Recovery  and  7-eply  of  Pope  Liberius.  215 

after  his  unhappy  fall,  had  become  more  zealous  for  the 
Nicene  faith,  and  received  them  to  communion  on  their 
subscribing  the  faith  of  Nicsea,  "  which,"  said  Liberius, 
"  contains  perfect  truth,  and  stops  the  mouths  of 
heretics."  At  the  same  time  they  condemned  the 
formula  of  Rimini,  and  censured  various  heresies  re- 
pugnant to  the  Nicene  Creed.  Liberius  wrote  a  letter  ^ 
in  his  own  name,  and  that  of  the  Bishops  of  Italy 
and  the  West,  to  sixty-six  Bishops  specified  by  name, 
and  to  all  the  orthodox  Bishops  of  the  East,  in  which 
he  testified  his  joy  at  the  union  thus  consummated 
between  the  Eastern  and  Western  Churches. 

This  was  one  of  the  last  acts  of  Pope  Liberius. 
Our  Lord's  words  to  St.  Peter,  "  When  thou  art  con- 
verted, strengthen  thy  brethren,"  ^  probably  sounded 
in  his  ears  with  a  voice  of  power.  He  retrieved  his 
denial  of  the  faith  by  a  good  confession  ;  and  he  who 
had  excommunicated  Athanasius,  and  joined  himself 
to  the  Arians,  now  condemned  Arianism,  and  pro- 
claimed the  truth  of  the  faith  for  which  Athanasius 
contended,  and  for  which  he  suffered  ;  and  he  followed 
Athanasius  in  an  endeavour  to  join  together  the  East 
and  the  West  in  one  confession  of  the  truth. 

The  letters  of  Liberius  were  carried  by  the  Eastern 
deputies  to  Sicily,  where  a  Synod  was  convened, 
which  agreed  with  them  in  confirming  the  Nicene 
faith.  These  envoys  had  similar  success  in  lUyria,^ 
where  Germanicus,^  Bishop  of  Sirmium  (so  notorious 
for  its  heretical  formularies),  was  partially  recovered 
to  the  faith.     They  were  also  well  received  at  Tyana 

•''  Contained  in  Socr.  iv.  12.  ^  Luke  xxii.  32. 

^  Theodoret,  iv.  8. 

s  He  was  brought  back  as  far  as  to  Semi-Arianism,  Concil.  Gen. 
ii.  841. 


2 1 6     Death  of  Liber  ins —  Co?itested  election  of  Damasus. 

in  Cappadocia,  where  the  letters  of  Liberius  were 
read  and  approved.^  They  went  also  to  Tarsus  in 
Cilicia  for  the  same  purpose  ;  but  in  that  design  they 
were  thwarted  by  Eudoxius,  the  Arian  Bishop  of 
Constantinople. 

Liberius  died  on  Sept.  24,  A.D.  366,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Damasus,  who  had  accompanied  him  in 
his  banishment  to  Beroea.  His  election  to  the  Papal 
Throne  was  disputed  by  a  rival,  Ursinus.^  Scenes  of 
riot  and  bloodshed  ensued,  which  gave  occasion  to 
the  censorious  strictures  of  the  heathen  historian, 
Ammianus  Marcellinus,^  on  the  wealth  of  Roman  Pre- 
lates, which  they  amassed  from  the  offerings  of  rich 
matrons,  and  on  their  splendid  costumes,  and  pompous 
equipages,  and  sumptuous  tables,  more  luxuriously 
furnished  than  those  of  kings.  "  Well  would  it  be  for 
them,"  he  adds,  "  if  they  would  imitate  the  lives  of 
some  provincial  Bishops  in  the  frugality  of  their 
diet,  the  simplicity  of  their  attire,  and  the  humility 
of  their  demeanour,  by  which  they  commend  them- 
selves to  the  Eternal  God  and  His  true  worshippers." 
"  Make  me  Bishop  of  Rome,"  said  one  of  its 
Prefects  to  Damasus,  "and  I  will  be  a  Christian  to- 
morrow." ^ 

The  removal  of  the  seat  of  Empire  from  Rome, 
and  the  rarity  of  the  visits  even  of  Western  Emperors 
to  Rome,  imparted  a  secular  importance  and  promi- 
nence to  the  power  of  its  Bishops,  and,  together  with 
other  concurrent  circumstances,  had  not  only  the 
effect  of  putting  the  Bishop  of  Rome  on  a  par  with 
the  most  illustrious  temporal  princes,  but  of  raising 
him  eventually  to  an  eminence  of  dominion  superior 

*  Concil.  Gen.  ii.  836.  *  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxvii.  3. 

2  Ibid.  ^  S.  Jerome,  Epist.  61  ad  Pammac. 


Moral  condition  of  Roman  Church.  2 1 7 

in  dignity  to  theirs,  and  far  wider  in  extent.  The 
place  vacated  by  the  Caesars  was  occupied  and  filled 
by  the  Popes.* 

The  cause  of  Damasus  was  successful.  He  was 
sixty  years  of  age  at  his  election  to  the  see,  and  held 
it  for  nearly  twenty  years.  He  maintained  the 
true  faith  ^  in  the  West,  and  was  distinguished  by 
literary  accomplishments.  He  was  an  elegant  versi- 
fier, according  to  S.  Jerome,^  who  served  when  young 
as  his  secretary  at  Rome  ;  but  he  was  not  to  be  com- 
pared in  nobility  of  spirit  with  his  predecessor  Julius, 
the  friend  of  Athanasius. 

It  must  be  confessed  that  increase  of  wealth  and 
honour  were  not  favourable  to  the  faith  and  morals  of 
Rome.  There  was  a  manifest  decline  in  Damasus, 
who,  as  we  shall  see,  in  his  intercourse  with  S.  Basil 
had  not  the  large-hearted  sympathies  for  those  who 
were  struggling  for  the  truth,  which,  as  we  have  said, 
had  characterized  Julius,  and  even  Liberius.  And  the 
effeminacy  and  libertinism  which  prevailed  amongst 
Ecclesiastics  at  Rome  are  described  with  severe 
reprobation  by  the  Pope's  Secretary,  S.  Jerome.^ 
These  and  other  causes  brought  upon  Rome,  as  a  just 
retribution,    the  calamities  which  she  suffered   when 

*  And  thus,  in  course  of  time,  St.  Paul's  prophecy  was  fulfilled.  May 
I  be  permitted  to  refer  to  my  note  on  2  Thess.  ii.  3 — 10? 

5  See  his  synodical  epistles  to  the  Bishops  of  Illyricum  against  the 
formula  at  Rimini,  to  the  Bishops  of  the  East  against  Apollinarius,  his 
confession  of  the  Catholic  faith  to  Paullinus  of  Antioch.  Concil. 
General,  ii.  889—904.  Theodoret,  v.  10,  ii.  Constant,  Epist.  Rom. 
Pontif.  pp.  311,  473,  591.     Tillemont,  tom.  viii.  pp.  386—424. 

6  S.  Jerome,  Scr.  Eccl.  c.  103,  "  Damasus  Romance  urbis  Episcopus, 
elegans  in  versibus  componendis  ingenium  habuit."  His  extant  Poems  do 
not  quite  correspond  to  this  eulogy  :  see  them  in  Migne,  Patrol,  xiii.  375. 

7  See  M.  Amedee  Thierry  in  his  Vie  de  S,  Jerome,  pp.  I— 218. 
Gibbon's  description  may  be  seen  in  his  chap.  xxv. 


2t8   Occupations  of  Athanasius — his  retreat  and  return. 

besieged,   sacked,   and   pillaged  by    Alaric    and  the 
Goths  in  A.D.  410. 

There  was  a  brief  lull  before  the  storm  which  was 
now  to  break  upon  the  East.  Athanasius  used  this 
time  of  peace  for  literary  work.  At  the  request  of 
the  Monks  of  the  West,  he  wrote  his  life  of  S. 
Anthony,  which  was  translated  ^  into  Latin  by  Eva- 
grius  in  the  lifetime  of  its  author.  He  now  also,  it 
is  said  by  some,^  composed  his  treatise  on  the  Incar- 
nation of  God  the  Word,  or,  as  it  is  entitled  by  early 
writers,  "  On  the  Trinity  and  the  Incarnation;"  and  his 
Epistle  to  Rufinianus,^  in  which  he  lays  down  the  true 
mode  of  dealing  with  those  who  had  lapsed  into 
heresy,  in  opposition  to  the  rigour  of  the  Luciferians 
on  the  one  side,  and  the  laxity  of  their  opponents  on 
the  other. 

The  peace  of  Athanasius  was  disturbed  for  a  short 
time  by  the.  order  of  Valens  in  A.D.  365  for  the  ex- 
pulsion of  all  Bishops  who  had  been  ejected  by  Con- 
stantius.  He  narrowly  escaped  with  his  life,  and 
retired  for  a  fifth  time  from  Alexandria,  and  took 
refuge  for  four  months,  it  is  said,  in  his  father's  tomb  ^ 
— probably  a  capacious  vaulted  chamber,  or  suite  of 
vaulted  chambers,  hewn  in  the  rock.  But  Valens  him- 
self soon  changed  his  policy  with  regard  to  Athana- 
sius, and  invited  him  to  return,  whether  for  fear 
of  Valentinian  his  brother,  who  maintained  the  faith 
of  Nicsea,  or  from  alarm  of  a  riot  at  Alexandria,  where 
the  Bishop  was  beloved  by  the  people.     Athanasius 


«  On  which,  see  vol.  i.pp.  431—434  of  the  present  work,  and  Athan. 
ed.  Bened.  626—693. 

8  Athan.  pp.  696 — 711.  Its  genuineness  as  a  whole  is  doubted  by 
others,     Cp.  Canon  Bright  in  Wace's  Diet.  i.  p.  200. 

1  Ibid.  767.  ^  Socr.  iv.  13.     Sozom.  vi.  12. 


Athanasius  on  the  Canon  of  Scripture.  219 

was  brought  back  in  triumph  to  his  Church  on  Feb.  i, 
A  D  366  The  Emperor,  himself  a  zealous  partisan 
of  Arianism,  and  a  violent  persecutor  of  the  Church, 
made  an  exception  in  favour  of  Athanasius,^  who 
for  forty  years  had  been  the  principal  champion  of 
the  faith,  and  the  special  object  of  the  malice  of  its 
Arian  enemies. 

In  the  spring  of  A.D.  3^7,  Athanasius  put  forth  a 
'  Festal    Letter,^  in  which  he  says,  "  Since  we  have 
spoken  of  the  heretics  as  dead,  and  of  ourselves  as 
having  the  divine  Scriptures  for  eternal  life  ;  and  since 
some  may  be  beguiled  from  their  simplicity  by  the 
wiles  of  certain  men,  and  may  read    other  writings 
which  are  called  Apocryphal,^  and  which   ought  not 
to  be  mingled  with  the  Scripture  which  is  inspired 
by   God,   it  seems   good   to    me  to   set  down  those 
Books  which  are  known  by  us  to  be  divine."     He  then 
specifies  the  Books  of  the  Old  Testament,  twenty-two  ^ 
in  number,  and  the  Books  of  the  New  Testament. 
These  are  precisely  the  same  as  in  our  own  Canon 
of    Scripture.      He    designates    the    Epistle   to    the 
Hebrews    as  an  Epistle  of  St.  Paul.      "These,"  he 
adds,  **  are  the  fountains  of  salvation,  that  he  who 
thirsteth  may  be  filled  with  their  oracles.     In  these 

3  Sozom.  vi.  12. 

4  These  "Festal  Letters"  were  issued  m  accordance  with  a  de- 
cree of  the  Nicene  Council  that  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria  should  put 
forth  annually  a  pastoral  encyclic  to  his  own  people  and  the  Bishop  of 
Rome,  announcing  the  day  on  which  Lent  would  begin  and  Easter  would 
,  „  5  Ed.  Bened.  p.  767. 

s  I  e  strictly  so  ;  not  ecclesiastical,  which  are  read  in  the  Church, 
such  as  Tobit,  Judith,  &c.     See  Hooker,  V.  xx.  7,  and  above,  p.  203. 

7  On  this  mode  of  reckoning  the  Canonical  Books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment  and  on  this  Catalogue  of  Athanasius,  see  Bishop  Cosin,  Scholas- 
tical  History  of  the  Canon,  Ivi.  vol.  iii.  p.  57,  ed.  Oxf.  1849,  and  Dr. 
Westcott  on  the  Canon,  p.  520  j  and  see  above,  pp.  200-205. 


220  Canon  of  Scripture. 

alone  is  the  doctrine  of  piety  preached  ;  let  no  one 
add  to  them,  or  take  anything  from  them." 
The  Scriptural  Canon  of  Athanasius  corresponds  with 
that  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea  (Canon  60),^  with  the 
exception  of  the  Apocalypse,  which  Athanasius  speci- 
fies as  a  work  of  St.  John,  but  which  is  not  mentioned 
by  the  Council  of  Laodicea.  He  then  adds  that  there 
is  a  third  class  of  books,^  not  "  indeed  received  into  the 
Canon,  but  which  our  Fathers  have  decreed  should  be 
read  by  those  who  desire  to  be  instructed  in  the  words 
of  piety.  Such  are  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  Wisdom 
of  Sirach,  Esther,  Judith,  Tobit,  the  '  doctrine,'  as  they 
call  it,  'of  the  Apostles/  and  the  Shepherd"  (of 
Hermas).^ 

This  statement  of  Athanasius  on  the  "Canon  of 
Holy  Scripture  "  is  very  important,  coming  as  it  does 
from  one  who  had  been  about  forty  years  a  Bishop  of 
the  Church,  and  was  in  communion  with  all  the 
faithful  in  the  East  and  West.  It  may  be  said  that 
it  represents  the  judgment  of  the  Church  Catholic  in 
the  fourth  century  on  the  question,  **  What  Books  are 
to  be  received  as  Canonical,  i.  e.  as  Divinely-inspired 
Scripture  ? "  And  it  justifies  the  course  taken  by  the 
Church  of  England  in  this  fundamental  matter,  in 
opposition  to  the  Church  of  Rome,  which  in  the  fourth 
Session  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  on  the  8th  of  April, 
1546,  affirmed  that  such  books  as  Judith,  Tobit, 
Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Maccabees  I.  and  H.  are  to  be 

8  See  above,  pp.  200 — 202. 

^  Which  we  call  Apocryphal^  but  which  would  be  more  correctly 
termed  Ecclesiastical,  as  read  in  the  Church  "  for  example  of  life  and  in- 
struction of  manners."  Art.  VI.  of  the  Church  of  England  ;  above,  p.  203. 

*  See  above,  vol.  i.  p.  85.  Athanasius,  in  his  work  "de  Decretis 
Nicoense  Synodi,"  says  that  the  ** Shepherd"  is  not  "in  the  Canon," 
§  18,  p.  176. 


S.  Athanasius  against  ApoUinariajusm.  221 

received  as  Canonical  ^  (i.  e.  as  equally  inspired  with 
those  of  Moses  and  the  Prophets,  which  our  Lord  re- 
ceived as  such).  Thus  the  Church  of  Rome  does  what 
Athanasius  forbade,  when  he  said,  **  Let  no  man  add  to 
these  Canonical  Books,  or  take  anything  from  them." 

About  this  time  (A.D.  370)  Athanasius  wrote  also 
his  Epistle  to  Epictetus,  Bishop  of  Corinth,^  in  which 
he  states  that  the  Councils  of  Gaul  and  Spain  and 
Rome  had  condemned  the  Arians,  and  had  confirmed 
the  faith  of  Nicaea.  He  contends  also  against  the 
error  of  those  who  said  that  the  Body  of  Christ  was 
Consubstantial  with  the  Word  ;  and  also  refutes  the 
opposite  heresy  which  affirms  that  Jesus  Christ  was  a 
Man  adopted  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  and  that  the 
Word  was  a  different  Person  from  Christ  Who  suf- 
fered. He  affirms  that  Christ  is  perfect  Man  in  body, 
soul,  and  spirit,  and  that  the  Eternal  Word  took  our 
nature  in  the  womb  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  joined  it 
for  ever  in  His  Person  to  the  Nature  of  God.  Thus 
by  anticipation  Athanasius  refuted  Nestorianism,  as 
well  as  condemned  Apollinarianism. 

He  concludes  this  Epistle  with  words  of  modesty 
and  humility,  praying  for  indulgence  and  correction. 

He  wrote  also  at  the  same  time  his  two  books* 
which  are  now  entitled  "  Books  against  Apollinarius." 
But  though  Athanasius  refutes  his  errors,  yet,  in 
charitable  consideration  for  his  merits,  he  never  men- 
tions him  by  name. 

In  another  act  of  charitable  forbearance,  he  tolerated 

2  Cone.  Trid.  Sess.  iv.,  "  Decretum  de  Canonicis  Scripturis."  In  this 
decree  the  Church  of  Rome  says  that  "whoever  does  not  receive  these 
books  as  Canonical — and  as  they  are  read  in  the  old  Vulgate  Latin  version 
— let  him  be  anathema." 

2  Ed.  Bened.  p.  720.  *  Pp.  736,  750. 


2  2  2     Ordination  of  Sideritis —  Conciliatory  judgment  of 

Athanasius  on  the  words  "  Person  "  and  "  Hypostasis^ 
the  ordination  of  Siderius,^  who  under  exceptional 
circumstances  had  been  consecrated  by  a  single 
Bishop,  instead  of  by  three  at  least,  as  prescribed  by 
the  Council  of  Nicaea,  and  without  the  consent  of  his 
Metropolitan.^ 

Another  specimen  of  his  conciliatory  spirit  and 
earnest  desire  for  peace  may  be  described  in  the 
words  of  Gregory  Nazianzen,^  when  he  says  that  he 
brought  the  Easterns  to  an  admission  of  the  orthodoxy 
of  the  Westerns,  using  the  word  persona  in  their  doc- 
trine concerning  the  Trinity  ;  and  that  he  also  brought 
the  Latins  to  acknowledge  the  soundness  of  the  Greek 
term  hypostasis  for  what  they  designated  by  irpoacoTrov 
or  Person.  "  He  listened  patiently  (says  Gregory) 
to  both  parties,  and  having  examined  the  significa- 
tion in  which  they  used  those  terms  respectively,  and 
having  found  that  both  were  orthodox,  he  conceded 
to  them  their  words,  and  thus  joined  them  together  in 
deed.  He  also  acknowledged  that  while  it  was  right 
to  speak  of  one  hypostasis  as  designating  the  one  sub- 
stance of  the  Godhead  in  the  three  Persons  of  the  Blessed 
Trinity^  yet  it  was  also  not  incorrect  to  speak  of 
three  hypostases^  it  being  understood  that  the  term 
hypostasis  was  then  used  in  the  sense  of  Person!'  ^ 

The  last  important  public  act  of  Athanasius  was  to 
summon  a  Synod  at  Alexandria,  in  which  he  showed 
that  he   combined  energy  with  mildness  ;  and  that 

5  Synesius,  Epist.  97.     Vit.  Athanas.  p.  Ixxxviii.  ed.  Bened. 

6  Canon.  Nicsen.  4.  This  act  of  Athanasius  is  interesting  in 
reference  to  a  recent  Consecration  among  the  "Old  Catholics"  by  a 
single  Bishop. 

7  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xxi.  §  35. 

«  See  De  Decretis,  §  27  ;  ad  Afros,  §  48. 

^  See  Athan.  Expos.  Fidei,  §  2  ;  Inillud  "  Omnia  mihi  tradita  sunt," 
§  6 ;  Tomus  ad  Antioch.  §  6,  where  the  two  senses  are  specified  and 
approved. 


His  firmness,  ble?ided  with  charity.  223 

while  he  was  fervent  in  charity  for  the  erring,  he  was 
in  the  maintenance   of   the    Faith 

In  the  name  of  that  Synod,  held  probably  in  A.D. 
367,  and  consisting  of  ninety  Bishops  from  Egypt, 
Libya,  and  Pentapolis,  he  wrote  an  Epistle  to  the 
African  Bishops,  whose  principal  see  was  at  Carthage. 
This  letter  may  be  regarded  as  his  farewell  exhorta- 
tion to  the  Church  to  hold  fast  the  true  faith  as  set 
forth  in  the  Council  of  Nicaea,  and  to  be  on  her 
guard  against  all  heretical  attempts  to  tamper  with  it. 

He  wrote  a  similar  letter  to  Pope  Damasus,  in 
which,  while  he  thanked  him  for  his  defence  of  the 
truth,  he  expostulated  with  him  for  not  having  con- 
demned Auxentius,  Bishop  of  Milan,  the  Arian  here- 
siarch,  in  the  Synod  recently  held  at  Rome.  This 
remonstrance  of  Athanasius  seems  to  have  been  effec- 
tual ;  in  another  Synod  at  Rome,  Damasus  and  his 
suffragans  adopted  part  of  the  Epistle  of  Athanasius, 
and  condemned  and  deposed  Auxentius.^ 

As  a  specimen  of  the  courageous  zeal  of  Athana- 
sius at  this  time  for  the  maintenance  of  moral  purity 
and  Church  discipline,  as  well  as  for  soundness  of 
doctrine,  may  be  mentioned  his  excommunication  of 
the  Governor  of  Libya,  a  man  of  profligate  life.  He 
communicated  this  act  by  letters  to  other  Churches, 
and  among  them  to  Csesarea  in  Cappadocia,  where 
Basil  had  lately  been  raised  to  the  Episcopate. 

The  Epistles,  six  in  number,  which  Athanasius 
received  from  S.  Basil,^  express  the  sentiments 
entertained  concerning  Athanasius  by  one  who  after 

*  Concil.  General,  ii.  pp.  888—893. 

2  Basil,  Epist.  61,  66,  67,  69,  So,  82,  ed.  Bened.  Paris,  173.  Basil 
was  consecrated  A.D.  370. 


2  24  S.  BasiFs  letters  to  S.  Athajiasiiis, 

him  became  one  of  the  greatest  Champions  of  the 
faith  in  Christendom. 

In  one  of  his  Epistles  to  Athanasius,^  Basil  says 
that  "  the  only  remedy  in  the  present  distress  "  (that  is, 
when  Valens  was  persecuting  the  Church)  "  was  in  the 
union  of  the  West  with  the  East ;  and  that  perhaps 
the  Emperor  would  pay  regard  to  the  authority  of 
the  multitude,  if  the  people  were  of  one  mind.  But 
who  has  more  power  to  effect  this  than  thy  prudence  ? 
Who  more  sagacious  in  perceiving  what  is  needed  ? 
Who  more  practical  in  executing  it  ?  Who  more 
sympathetic  in  the  afflictions  of  the  brethren  ?  Who 
more  venerable  in  the  eyes  of  the  West  ?  Bequeath 
a  monument  worthy  of  thy  life  and  conversation, 
O  most  esteemed  Father,  and  be  a  Samuel  to  the 
Churches." 

Basil  exhorts  him  also  to  take  under  his  care  the 
Church  of  Antioch,  distracted  by  heresy  and  schism, 
which  he  alone  can  heal.  "  The  opinion  which  I  had 
of  thy  excellence,"  he  says,'*  "  is  confirmed  and  in- 
creased by  time.  Others  are  content  with  caring  for 
the  parts  of  the  Church  entrusted  to  their  charge. 
Thou  carest  for  the  whole,  as  much  as  for  thine  own 
portion  of  it.  Thou  dost  not  omit  occasions  for 
deliberating,  admonishing,  writing  letters,  and  send- 
ing envoys  bearing  the  best  counsels.  When  there- 
fore we  desire  any  help,  we  begin  with  resorting  to  thy 
perfection  as  the  summit  of  all  things,^  and  by  using 
thee  as  our  counsellor  and  guide." 

Again,®  "The  more  the  disorders  of  the  Church 


3  Epist.  66.  '^  Epist.  67. 

5  In  S.  Basil's  eyes  the  See  of  Alexandria,  when  filled  by  Athanasius, 
held  a  higher  place  in  this  respect  than  the  See  of  Rome. 

6  Epist.  80. 


6".  Basil  to  S.  At/ia?iasiiis.  225 

multiply,  the  more  all  men  turn  to  thee,  deeming  thy 
protection  to  be  the  only  comfort  left  us  in  our  pre- 
sent distress."  And,^  "  When  we  look  at  our  own 
difficulties,  we  are  driven  to  despair  ;  but  when  we  turn 
our  eyes  to  thee,  and  reflect  that  thou  art  left  by  the 
Lord  to  be  the  physician  of  our  maladies,  then  we 
draw  upward  our  minds  from  despondency, and  emerge 
into  hope.  For  what  other  person  is  fit  to  be  our 
pilot  in  the  storm,  but  he  who  from  his  childhood  has 
contended  in  conflicts  for  the  faith  .?  Since  therefore 
all  our  welfare  as  to  the  faith  depends  on  communion 
and  unity  among  those  who  agree  therein,  we  con- 
fidently appeal  to  thee,  and  exhort  thy  long-suffering 
to  send  to  us  all  an  Epistle  advising  us  what  is  to  be 
done.  It  is  the  common  desire  that  in  all  our  con- 
ferences we  should  begin  with  thee." 

In  listening  to  these  words  of  S.  Basil,  speaking  in 
the  name  of  the  Church  concerning  Athanasius,  we 
may  well  dispense  with  any  other  eulogy  of  him. 
The  Epitaph  of  S.  Athanasius  is,  as  it  were, 
written  by  S.  Basil.  He  fell  asleep  in  peace  at 
Alexandria,  May  2,  A.D.  373.  His  funeral  oration,  if 
we  may  so  speak,  was  pronounced  at  Constantinople 
seven  years  subsequently  by  Basil's  friend,  Gregory 
Nazianzen,  afterwards  Bishop  of  that  see.^ 

It  was  in  some  respects  a  providential  thing,  that 
the  storm  of  persecution  under  the  Arian  Emperor 
Valens  was  raging  at  its  height  when  Athanasius  "the 
Great "  was  taken  to  his  rest.^  For  nearly  forty-seven 
years  the  true  Faith  had  been  almost  identified  with 
his  name.     It  was    mixed    up   with    personal    accu- 

'  Epist.  82. 

8  See  Greg.  Nazian.  Orat.  xxi.,  and  below,  chap.  ix. 
^  Theodoret,  iv.  17.     Sozom.  vi.  19. 
VOL.    II.  Q 


2  26  Men  pass  away  ;  the  Faith  remains. 

sations  against  him.  The  alleged  murder  of  Arsenius, 
the  broken  chalice  of  Ischyras — these  and  other  matters 
in  which  his  honour  was  concerned,  were  debated 
with  as  much  eagerness  as  the  Homoousion  itself. 
At  the  beginning  of  the  year  373,  Athanasius  was  left 
almost  alone  amongst  the  earlier  champions  of  the 
faith.  Hosius  of  Corduba  had  passed  away.  Julius 
was  dead.  Liberius  of  Rome  was  no  more.  Hilary 
of  Poictiers,  Eusebius  of  Vercellae,  had  fallen  asleep 
in  the  Lord.  Hilary  had  instructed  the  heroic  sol- 
dier, afterwards  Bishop  of  Tours/  S.  Martin.  Atha- 
nasius still  survived.  It  might  seem  as  if  the 
battle  was  to  be  fought  by  him  alone,  and  for  him 
alone.  It  was  well  that  the  Church  should  learn  that 
her  work  upon  earth  is  not  to  contend  for  any  man, 
however  great  and  holy.  The  battle  was  not  to  be 
fought  for  Athanasius,  but  for  God.  Men  disappear  ; 
the  Faith  remains.  The  Church  is  built  upon  the 
Rock,  Which  is  Christ.  When  an  Athanasius  dies, 
God  raises  up  others  in  his  room.  Basil,  who  was 
consecrated  at  Caesarea  three  years  before  the  death 
of  Athanasius ;  Basil's  friend,  Gregory  Nazianzen, 
Bishop  of  Constantinople  ;  Basil's  brother,  Gregory, 
Bishop  of  Nyssa  ;  all  these  in  the  East,  and  Ambrose 
in  the  West,  consecrated  Bishop  of  Milan  the  year 
after  the  death  of  Athanasius,  followed  after  him, 
treading  in  his  footsteps.  Age  after  age,  cen- 
tury after  century,  passes  away  ;  but  the  Light  of 
Divine  Truth  survives  and  shines ;  and  (as  in  the 
bright  Xa/jL7raSr)(j)opla  or  Torch-race  of  old)  one  runner 
succeeds  another,  bearing  that  same  light  of  Truth  ; 
saints  succeed  saints  in  the  course,  and  hand  on  the 

1  Trobably  in  a.d.  367. 


The  sacred  torch-race — Faith  will  vanish  into  sight.  227 

light  in  an  unbroken  chain  of  succession,  even  to  the 
end  of  time, 

*'  Et,  quasi  cursores,  Vital  lampada  tradunt ;"  ^ 

and  so  the  race  will  continue  to  be  run,  till  at  length 
the  Light  of  the  Faith  will  melt  into  the  Vision  of 
God. 

2  Lucret.  ii.  78. 


Q  2 


CHAPTER  VII. 

From  the  Accession  of  tJie  Emperor  Valens,  and  the 
Ordination  of  S.  Basil,  A.D.  364,  to  the  Death 
of  Valens,  Ang.  g,  378,  a7id  the  Death  of  S.  Basil, 
Jan.  I,  379. 

The  last  nine  years  of  the  life  of  Athanasius  (with 
one  or  two  brief  intervals),  from  the  spring  of  A.D  364 
to  that  of  A.D.  373,  were  to  him,  as  we  have  seen, 
comparatively  a  time  of  peace  and  repose.  We  must, 
therefore,  revert  to  the  year  A.D.  364  for  the  history 
of  the  more  active  conflicts  and  patient  sufferings  of 
the  Church. 

The  year  364  was  made  memorable  by  two  events 
which  had  a  powerful  influence  on  each  other,  and  on 
the  fortunes  of  the  Church,  especially  in  the  East  ; 
one  was  the  elevation  of  Valens  to  the  dignity  of 
Augustus  on  the  28th  of  March  in  that  year ;  the 
other  was  the  Ordination  of  Basil  of  Caesarea  to  the 
priesthood  in  the  same  year.i 

After    that   time,   for  fourteen  years,  Valens,   the 

1  This  is  the  date  assigned  by  the  learned  Benedictine  Editor  of  his 
works,  Maran,  who  has  done  for  S.  Basil  what  his  brother  Benedictine, 
Montfaucon,  did  for  Athanasius.  The  Life  of  S.  Basil  (written  after 
Tillemont)  by  Maran,  which  fills  151  of  the  pages  in  the  third  volume 
in  the  Paris  edition,  1730,  is  an  invaluable  storehouse  for  the  history 
of  S.  Basil  and  his  times.  References  to  more  modern  works  may  be 
seen  in  the  valuable  article  on  Basil  by  Precentor  Venables  in  Professor 
Wace's  Dictionary  of  Christian  Biography,  vol.  i.  pp.  282—297. 


Chronological  coincidences  of  Valens  and  Basil :  Contrast  229 

of  Constatitius  and  Valens. 
Emperor  of  the  East,  and  S.  Basil — first  as  Priest, 
and  next  as  Bishop  of  Caesarea  in  Cappadocia — held 
the  principal  places  in  the  Church.  Its  history  during 
that  time  converges  towards  them  as  to  two  centres 
— the  one  secular,  the  other  spiritual. 

It  may  also  be  remarked  that  as  the  course  of 
active  energy  both  of  Valens  and  Basil  commenced 
at  the  same  time,  so  it  was  continued  side  by  side 
contemporaneously  ;  and  there  was  also  a  chronolo- 
gical coincidence  between  the  end  as  well  as  the 
beginning  of  both.  Valens  was  killed  at  Adrianople 
on  the  9th  of  August,  378  ;  Basil  died  at  Caesarea 
less  than  six  months  afterwards,  on  January  i, 
A.D.  379. 

The  age  of  both  was  nearly  the  same  at  their 
deaths — namely,  fifty  years. 

The  persecution  of  the  Church  under  Valens  must 
be  carefully  distinguished  as  to  its  character  from  that 
which  the  Catholics  had  to  endure  under  Constantius. 
Constantius  never  expressed  any  direct  intention  of  un- 
doing his  father^s  work  at  Nicaea.  He  would  have  dis- 
claimed the  name  of  Arian.  He  wished  to  be  thought 
a  theologian,  and  was  fond  of  displaying  his  eloquence 
and  ingenuity,  especially  in  dogmatic  discussions  ; 
and  therefore  his  reign  was  distinguished  by  the 
summoning  of  Synods,  and  by  a  continuous  suc- 
cession of  Creeds.  Much  also  of  his  activity  in  perse- 
cution may  be  ascribed  to  personal  jealousy  of  Atha- 
nasius. 

But  Valens  was  a  very  different  person.  As  de- 
scribed by  Marcellinus,^  he  was  not  without  some 
virtues,  such  as  "  firm  attachment  to  friends,  strict 
in  the  application  of  civil  and  military  discipline,  an 

^  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxxi.  14. 


230  Character  of  Valens — Reign  of  terror. 

equitable  Guardian  of  the  Provinces,  liberal  and 
generous.  On  the  other  hand,  he  was  immoderately 
covetous,  impatient  of  toil,  of  a  stolid  intellect, 
without  education  either  in  liberal  studies  or  in  the 
art  of  war  ;  prone  to  cruelty,  and,  though  he  professed 
to  act  according  to  law,  yet  he  allowed  nothing  to  be 
done  in  opposition  to  his  own  passions  ;  injurious  and 
wrathful,  listening  eagerly  to  all  accusations  ;  dawdling 
and  lazy.^  This,"  adds  Marcellinus,  "is  the  testimony 
of  one  who  was  his  contemporary  (namely,  the  historian 
himself),  and  knew  him  well."  He  was  also  supersti- 
tious, of  which  Ammianus  gives  some  specimens,  and 
of  which  more  will  be  said  hereafter.  Valens  did  not 
imitate  Constantius  in  summoning  Councils,  or  in 
framing  Creeds.  He  did  not  war  against  the  Church 
by  rhetoric  or  dogmatism.  He  was  resolved  to  destroy 
the  faith  of  Nicsea,  and  to  establish  Arianism,  and 
nothing  but  Arianism,  by  brute  force.  His  imperial 
rule  was  a  reign  of  terror  for  the  Church. 

If  we  investigate  the  causes  which  produced  that  par- 
ticular form  of  persecution  which  raged  under  Valens, 
and  inquire  into  the  reasons  for  which  so  savage  a  war 
was  allowed  by  the  Divine  Head  of  the  Church  to  be 
waged  against  the  faith,  and  what  were  the  purposes 
which  it  served,  we  may  probably  arrive  at  the 
solution  of  the  problem. 

The  numerous  attempts  at  compromises  under 
Constantius  had  failed.  Their  failure  had  been  of 
great  use,  as  showing  that  there  was  no  middle  point 
between  Homoousianism  and  pure  Arianism.  The 
ground  was  now  cleared  between  these  two  parties, 
and  they  were  brought  into  direct  antagonism  and 
collision.     Pure  Arianism,  so  to  speak,  was  put  on  its 

Aurelius  Victor,  Epist.46,  says  he  was  also  cowardly — "sane  timidus." 


Alarms  of  Arianism.  231 

mettle.  It  saw  a  new  danger  arising  to  what  it  deemed 
the  truth,  in  the  prominence  now  being  given  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  no  less 
than  to  that  of  the  Son,  which  it  had  strenuously 
impugned.  It  was  alarmed  by  this  fresh  peril.  No 
doubt  some  in  its  ranks  conscientiously  thought  that 
they  were  contending  for  the  divine  Unity  against 
Tritheism.  They  had  seen  Polytheism  recently  revived 
under  Julian,  and  they  feared  that  the  Church  might 
relapse  into  it,  unless  they  put  forth  their  strength. 
Such  was  the  struggle  in  which  the  Powers  of  darkness 
engaged  against  the  Church  under  Valens. 

It  pleased  God  for  the  wisest  reasons  to  permit 
that  terrible  conflict.  We  shall  see  in  the  sequel  that 
pure  Arianism  failed  under  Valens,  though  backed  by 
the  imperial  power,  just  as  Semi-Arian  compromises 
had  failed  under  Constantius,  and  Polytheism  had 
failed  under  Julian.  Homoousianism  triumphed  over 
all.  The  doctrine  of  the  Holy,  Blessed,  and  Undivided 
Trinity  was  proved  not  to  be  Tritheism  on  the  one 
side,nor  Sabellianism  on  the  other.  And  thus  the  peace- 
policy  under  Constantine,  admitting  Arius  to  Com- 
munion, and  the  three  different  persecutions  of  the 
Church,  under  Constantius,  Julian,  and  Valens,  pre- 
pared the  way  for  the  complete  triumph  of  the  true 
Faith  at  the  Council  of  Constantinople  under  Theo- 
dosius,  and  for  its  firm  establishment  at  that  Council 
for  now  fifteen  hundred  years. 

The  beginning  of  the  persecution  under  Valens  has 
been  assigned  by  some  to  the  year  367,  the  time  when 
he  was  about  to  march  against  the  Goths,  who  had 
passed  the  Danube,  and  were  ravaging  Thrace,  and 
when  he  received  baptism  at  the  hands  of  Eudoxius, 
the  Arian  Bishop  of  Constantinople,  who,  it  is  said, 


232  Persecution  of  Catholics  wider  Valens. 

being-  aided  by  the  imperial  consort,  Albia  Dominica, 
engaged  Valens,  by  a  pledge  at  his  baptism,  to  propa- 
gate Arianism,  and  to  persecute  the  Church,*  The 
persecution  was  indeed  fiercer  after  that  time,  but  it 
had  already  broken  out.  In  A.D.  365  Valens  had 
wreaked  his  wrath  on  the  Bishops  at  the  Council  of 
Lampsacus,  and  had  waged  war  against  the  Semi- 
Arians,"  and  Novatians,as  well  as  against  the  Catholics, 
and  had  suppressed  the  assembly  at  Tarsus,  because  it 
was  opposed  to  Arianism. 

In  A.D.  370,  Eudoxius,  Bishop  of  Constantinople, 
died.  Demophilus,  the  Arian  Bishop  of  Beroea  in 
Thrace,  who  had  tempted  Liberius  to  his  fall,  was 
placed  by  the  Emperor  and  the  Arians  in  his  room  ; 
and  thus  the  Arian  heresy  was  continued  at  Constan- 
tinople, where  it  had  been  dominant  almost  without 
interruption  for  thirty  years.  The  Catholics  chose 
Evagrius,  who  was  banished,  and  died  in  exile  ;  and 
a  general  persecution  began. ^ 

The  Emperor  was  then  at  Nicomedia.  A  deputa- 
tion of  eighty  presbyters  came  to  him  there,  and  pre- 
sented a  petition  for  mercy  and  redress.  Valens 
was  incensed  by  this  remonstrance,  but  dissembled 
his  resentment  till  he  had  given  order  to  the  Prefect 
Modestus  (of  whom  we  shall  hear  more  in  the  his- 
tory of  S.  Basil)  to  apprehend  them  and  put  them 
to  death  ;  and  lest  the  murder  of  so  many  venerable 
persons  might  produce  a  riot  in  the  city,  they  were 
embarked  in  a  ship  under  the  pretence  of  their  being 
only  conveyed  away  into  banishment  ;  but  at  the 
same  time  orders  were  given  that  when  they  were 
out  at  sea,  and  the  ship  was   in  full  sail,  it  should  be 

*  Theodoret  iv.  12,  13.     Sozom.  vi.  8 — 10. 

*  Socr.  iv.  2,  5,  6,  9.    Sozom.  vi.  12.      ^  Socr.  iv.  15.    Sozom.  vi.  14. 


Attempts  of  Valens  against  Basil— Basil's  history.    233 

set  on  fire  ;  which  was  done  by  the  mariners,  who 
escaped  by  a  boat  ;  and  the  ship  was  carried  on  by 
an  east  wind,  till  it  was  consumed  by  the  fire  with 
the  eighty  presbyters  on  board,  who  were  burnt  in  it.'^ 
Not  long  afterwards  Valens  came  to  Antioch,  and 
there  he  destroyed  many  Catholics  by  drowning  them 
in  the  river  Orontes.^ 

From  Bithynia,  Valens  proceeded  to  Galatia,  where 
he  continued  the  work  of  persecution  ;  and  he  hoped 
to  be  equally  successful  in  Cappadocia,  which  was 
distracted  by  the  feuds  consequent  on  the  election  of 
S.  Basil  to  the  Metropolitan  See  of  his  native  place, 
Csesarea,  in  A.D.  370. 

The  Ecclesiastical  career  of  S.  Basil  had  com- 
menced six  years  earlier,  namely,  in  the  year  364, 
when  he  was  ordained  to  the  priesthood— the  first 
year  of  the  reign  of  Valens.  From  that  time  he  was 
regarded  as  one  of  the  most  powerful  champions  of 
the  faith,  and  one  of  the  most  formidable  antagonists 
to  Arianism  ;  he  was,  therefore,  already  marked  out 
as  a  special  object  of  persecution. 

Basil  was  born  probably  in  A.D.  329,  of  noble  and 
devout  Christian  parents.  His  father,  Basil,  was  a 
teacher  of  rhetoric,  and  by  his  wife  Emmelia  had  ten 
children,  three  of  whom— Basil  the  eldest,  the  third, 
Gregory,  the  tenth,  Peter— became  Bishops  of  the 
Church;  Basil  of  Caesarea,  Gregory  of  Nyssa, 
Peter  of  Sebaste.  Basil  had  also  an  uncle  Gregory, 
who  was  a  Bishop  in  Cappadocia.  Macrina,  Basil's 
irrandmother,  who  had  been  a  hearer  of  Gregory 
Thaumaturgus,  Bishop  of  Neo-Csesarea,  the  cele- 
brated scholar  of  Origen,^  was  a  Lois  to  Basil,  as   his 

7  Socr.  iv.  16.     Sozom.  vi.  14.  ^  Socr.  iv.  17. 

^  See  above,  vol.  i.  274,  283. 


2  34  BasiVs  early  life — Ccenobia. 

mother  Emmelia  was  an  Eunice  ;  and  thus  in  his 
childhood  he  imbibed  a  love  for  the  faith.  His 
early  education  was,  it  would  seem,  at  some  place  in 
Pontus  where  his  father  taught  rhetoric  ;  thence  he 
passed  to  Caesarea,  his  native  place,  thence  to  Con- 
stantinople, and  thence  to  Athens.  There  his  friend- 
ship was  strengthened  with  Gregory  of  Nazianzus, 
who  had  known  Basil  at  Caesarea  ;  there  also  he  was  a 
fellow-student  with  Julian,  the  future  Emperor.  His 
fame  for  intellectual  ability  and  attainments,  espe- 
cially in  rhetoric,  philosophy,  and  literature,  was  not 
greater  than  his  reputation  for  sanctity  of  life.  He 
left  Athens  A.D.  355  or  356,  and  returned  to  his 
native  city  Caesarea,  where  he  was  enthusiastically 
received,  and  invited  to  become  a  teacher  of  eloquence. 
His  sister  Macrina  warned  him  against  temptations 
to  vain-glory,  and  pointed  out  to  him  the  perils  he 
was  incurring  from  popular  applause  of  his  eloquence. 
He  became  a  reader  in  the  Church  under  the  Bishop 
Dianius,  and  being  deeply  affected  by  the  sudden 
death  of  his  next  brother  Naucratius,  in  his  twenty- 
second  year,  about  A.D.  357,  he  resolved  to  retire 
from  Caesarea  for  a  time ;  he  went  into  Egypt, 
and  visited  the  monasteries  there,  and  resolved  to 
imitate  that  form  of  monastic  life  which  combined 
religious  meditation,  worship,  and  study,  with  the 
exercise  of  Christian  charities,  and  which  was  called 
the  ccenobitic  life,  as  distinguished  from  that  of  the 
anchorite  or  hermit,  and  also  from  that  of  those  who 
were  ternied  viigades  or  ascetics,  who  were  monks  rov- 
ing from  place  to  place,  and  mingling  with  the  world. 
His  friend,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  thus  speaks  on 
this  topic  :  ^  "  Since  the  eremitical  life  and  the  social 

1  Orat.  xliii.  p.  817. 


Grego7j  N'azianze?!.  on  Basil's  Canohia  or  Colleges.   235 

are  very  different  from,  and  contrary  to,  one  another  ; 
and  since  neither  life  has  unmixed  good  or  evil,  the 
former  being  more  tranquil  and  favourable  to  spiritual 
communion  with  God,  and  on  this  account  liable  to 
produce  spiritual  pride  (inasmuch  as  social  virtues  are 
not  exercised  thereby,  and  there  is  no  place  for  com- 
parison of  man  with  man),  and  the  other  life  is  more 
practical  and  useful,  but  less  free  from  turmoil  ;  there- 
fore Basil  tempered  and  blended  both  lives  together  " 
(by  the  erection  of  his  Ccenobia),  "  in  order  that  con- 
templation might  not  be  without  society,  nor  action 
be  without  contemplation,  but  that,  like  land  and 
sea,  they  might  contribute  their  benefits  mutually  to 
each  other,  and  be  joined  together  in  glorifying  God." 
In  a  word,  S.  Basil  instituted  the  Collegiate  life 
in  Asia  Minor.  He  established  a  Coenohitim  or 
College  in  a  picturesque  retreat  in  his  own  paternal 
estate  not  far  from  Neo-Caesarea  in  Pontus.^  Many 
flocked  to  him  there.  The  Ccenobia  were  multiplied, 
and  became  a  small  University.'  The  study  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  of  Theology  generally,  frequent  reli- 
gious services,  \vith  singing  of  Psalms  and  Hymns, 
frugal  fare,  hard  living,  manual  labour,  these  were  the 
characteristics  of  their  life  ;  and  these  Ccenobia  or 
Colleges  were  also  schools  of  the  young,  and  centres 
of  missionary  work  to  the  neighbouring  country, 
which  was  evangelized  by  them.* 

2  See  Greg.  Naz.  Epist.  8  and  9,  who  visited  Basil  there. 

3  Sozom.  vi.  17. 

^  He  was  visited  there  by  his  friend  and  former  fellow-collegian  at 
Athens,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  his  senior  by  about  four  years  ;  and  there, 
among  other  labours  in  common,  they  produced  what  is  called  he 
Philocalia,  or  Anthology  of  choice  extracts,  culled  from  the  works  of 
their  favourite  author,  Origen  (see  above,  vol.  i.  p.  274).  And  he  also 
worked  with  Basil  in  framing  his  ascetic  rules  for  the  government  of 


236      Ordination  of  Gi'egofj  Nazianzen — and  of  Basil. 

It  has  been  supposed  by  some  that  about  this  time 
(A.D.  362)  Basil  received  a  friendly  letter  from  the 
Emperor  Julian,  whom  he  had  known  at  Athens.  But 
this  is  doubtful.^ 

Basil's  friend,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  was  ordained  to 
the  Priesthood,  December  25,  A.D.  362,  in  order  to 
assist  his  father,  Bishop  of  Nazianzus  ;  and  Basil  him- 
self was  invited  to  return  to  Caesarea  by  Dianius, 
Bishop  of  Caesarea,  who,  like  Gregory's  father,  was 
among  the  Bishops  who  had  been  entrapped  into 
signing  the  formula  of  Rimini,  but  w^ho  afterwards 
rued  what  they  had  done. 

About  this  time  Basil  wrote  his  books  against 
Eunomius  the  Arian.  After  the  death  of  Dianius, 
Eusebius,  a  civil  magistrate  of  exemplary  character, 
who  had  not  been  baptized,  was,  in  consequence  of  a 
conflict  of  parties,  suddenly  elevated  to  the  Episcopal 
See  of  Caesarea.  In  the  autumn  of  A.D.  364,  when 
Arianism  was  raising  its  head  under  Valens,  Basil 
was  ordained  to  the  Priesthood  ;  and  from  that  time 
to  his  death  on  January  i,  379,  he  occupied  the  prin- 
cipal place  in  maintaining  the  faith,  and  in  contend- 
ing against  heresy  in  the  East.  He  became  the  coun- 
sellor and  commissary  of  his  Bishop,  Eusebius,  who, 
having  enlisted  him  in  his  service,  was  afterwards 
tempted  to  jealousy  by  the  merits  and  fame  of  his 
auxiliary.     Parties    were   formed   in   the  Church    of 


monastic  bodies,  and  i^eligious  societies  of  women.     See  Basilii  Opera, 
ii.  526 — 582.     Some  of  these  are  of  doubtful  origin  ;  see  ibid.  p.  533. 

^  See  Maran,  Vita  Basil,  p.  Ix.,  and  Canon  Wordsworth's  article  on 
Julian  in  Wace's  Dictionary.  The  Basil,  to  whom  Julian's  12th  letter 
is  addressed,  had  been  at  Court,  which  Basil  of  Caesarea  never  was. 
The  other  letter  (Epist.  75)  is  clearly  spurious  (ibid.  p.  Ixiii).  These 
letters  may  be  seen  in  Basilii  Opera,  iii.  122,  123. 


Basil  returns  to  Ccesarea  for  the  hatt/e  against  Jrianisui.  237 

Cc-Esarea  ;    and    in    order  to  prevent  a  schism   Basil 
retired  quietly  to  his  Coenobium  in  Pontus. 

The  persecution  which  had  broken  out  under  Valens, 
and  was  menacing  Csesarea.  had  the  good  effect  of 
healing  the  difference  between  the  Bishop  Eusebius 
and  his  presbyter  Basil,  under  the  kindly  influence 
and  sympathetic  mediation  of  Basil's  friend,  Gregory 
Nazianzen. 

The  invitation  given  to  Basil  by  Eusebius,  and 
Basil's  prompt  return  to  Caesarea  to  meet  the  com- 
ing danger,  were  honourable  to  both.  The  services 
of  the  Bishop's  Commissary  became  more  valuable 
than  before,  and  were  recognized  by  him  with  un- 
grudging gratitude.  Basil  took  a  leading  part  in 
the  endeavour,  already  described,^  to  enlist  the  sym- 
pathies of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  of  the  Western 
Church  generally,  in  an  endeavour  to  unite  the 
Semi-Arians  with  the  orthodox,  and  to  join  toge- 
ther the  West  with  the  East  in  a  strenuous  effort 
to  check  Arianism,  and  to  maintain  the  faith  of 
Nicsea. 

For  a  short  time  the  storm  of  persecution  was 
lulled  by  the  rebellion  of  Procopius  against  Valens, 
from  the  summer  of  A.D.  365  to  that  of  A.D.  ^66. 
This  period  of  respite  was  a  time  of  religious  activity 
to  Basil.  To  quote  the  words  of  his  friend  Gregory,^ 
"  He  was  engaged  in  the  care  of  the  Poor,  of  Strangers, 
of  Virgins,  in  giving  Laws  orally,  and  in  writing  to 
Monasteries,  and  in  the  ordering  of  public  Prayers  ^ 

"  See  above,  pp.  224,  225.  7  Greg.  Naz.  Orat  xx. 

8  The  Liturgy  of  S.  Basil,  which  (with  some  additions)  is  still  used 
on  certain  days  in  the  Eastern  Church,  belongs  to  that  date.  There 
are  three  revisions  of  that  Liturgy— the  Greek,  the  Armenian,  and  the 
Coptic.    The  Greek  is  the  most  reliable.    The  length  of  the  Liturgy  now 


238  Liturgy  of  S.  Basil. 

and  the  devout  worship  of  the  sanctuary  ;  indeed,  in 
whatever  a  man  of  God,  working  with  God,  could  be 
profitable  to  the  people."  Basil  was  unwearied  in  his 
labours  of  charity.  He  bestowed  the  greatest  part 
of  his   private   property  in  good  works.^     Especially 


known  as  S.  Basil's  is  twice  that  of  earlier  Liturgies,  so  far  as  the  use 
of  the  Clergy  is  concerned,  but  not  so  for  the  People.  The  daily  office 
for  the  people  began  at  daybreak,  and  consisted  of  confession  of  sins, 
antiphonal  Psalmody,  reading  the  Scripture.  After  it  was  a  pause  for 
meditation  and  confession  to  God  in  silence. 

Then  followed  a  longer  form  for  the  use  of  the  Clergy  and  reli- 
gious orders.  S.  Basil,  Epist.  207,  p.  310.  The  Liturgy,  so  called,  of 
S.  Basil,  is  given  by  the  Benedictine  Editors  in  vol.  ii.  of  Basil's  works 
in  the  Alexandrine  and  Coptic  forms  (pp.  674—696).  Cp.  Bingham, 
xiii.  5,  who  observes  that  the  Liturgy  of  St.  James  being  considered  too 
long,  Bosil  framed  a  shorter  Liturgy.  He  examines  the  question, 
*'  Why  no  ancient  Liturgy  has  been  preserved  in  its  original  form?  " 

The  form  in  which  Basil's  Liturgy  is  now  used  in  the  Eastern  Church, 
and  which  "is  modified  from  that  of  St.  James  as  the  Liturgy  of 
S.  Chrysostom  is  from  that  of  S.  Basil,"  has  been  printed  by  Dr.  J.  M. 
Neale  (Lond.  1858)  from  the  Venice  Edition  of  1840.  It  is  used  in 
the  Eastern  Church  on  all  Sundays  in  Lent,  except  Palm  Sunday  ;  on 
Maundy  Thursday,  Easter  Even,  the  Vigils  of  Christmas,  the  Epiphany, 
and  the  Festival  of  S.  Basil,  January  i.  For  its  history  see  Palmer, 
Origines  Liturgicce,  i.  45 — 72;  Neale's  Eastern  Church,  i.  317,  325, 
ii.  ch.  vi. ;  Bunsen,  Hippolytus,  vol.  iv.,  Analecta  Antenic^na,  iii. 
p.  201  ;  Archdeacon  Cheetham  on  Liturgies,  p.  1022  of  his  Dictionary 
of  Christian  Antiq.     More  will  be  said  on  it  below,  pp.  278 — 282. 

There  is  an  interesting  passage  in  Basil's  book,  De  Spiritu 
Sancto  (chap,  xxvii.  n.  26),  "The  Words  of  Invocation  at  the 
Consecration  (ofctSeilts)  of  the  Bread  of  Thanksgiving  and  the 
Cup  of  Blessing,  what  sacred  author  has  left  to  us  in  writing?" 
On  the  Eucharistic  sense  of  the  word  oj'a5ei|£S,  see  Suicer.  I>ex.  in 
voce,  p.  255.  It  is  equivalent  to  the  Latin  "  confectio  corporis  et 
sanguinis."  The  words  in  the  Liturgy  of  Basil  (0pp.  ii.  297)  are,  ^KQ^iv 
Th  irvevfj.d  crov  rh  ayiov  i(p'  rj/xas  tovs  SovXovs  crov  Kal  inl  to,  TrpoKeifievd 
(Tov  hupa  ravra,  koX  ayiacai  koX  avaSeTlat  ayia  ayiwv,  "  and  to  make  this 
bread  to  become  to  those  who  receive  it  the  Holy  Body  of  our  Lord  God 
and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ  for  the  remission  of  sins  and  for  everlasting 
life,  and  this  Cup  to  become  the  precious  Blood  of  the  New  Testament 
of  our  Lord  and  God  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ." 

'  Greg.  Nyssen.  in  Eunomium,  lib.  i.  p.  307. 


BasiFs  election  to  the  See  of  Ccesarea.  239 

was  he  unsparing  in  his  liberality  and  personal 
assiduity  in  the  time  of  the  terrible  dearth  and 
drought  which  afflicted  Caesarea  in  A.D.  368,  when 
he  delivered  his  celebrated  homily  on  that  cala- 
mity.^ 

Eusebius,  Bishop  of  Caesarea,  died  in  370.  Csesarea 
was  the  Metropolitan  See  of  Cappadocia,  and  the 
jurisdiction  of  that  see  included  not  only  Cappadocia, 
but  extended  to  Pontus,  and  even  to  Armenia.^  The 
Province  had  been  under  the  Episcopal  rule  of  Dianius 
for  twenty  years,  who  had  wavered  in  the  faith,  and  for 
eight  more  under  that  of  his  successor  Eusebius,  who 
had  little  theological  learning. 

Basil's  merits  were  in  some  respects  a  hindrance  to 
him.  His  orthodoxy  was  too  definite,  and  his  dis- 
cipline too  rigid,  in  the  opinion  of  many  of  the  com- 
provincial Bishops,  in  whose  hands  the  appointment 
to  the  vacant  Archbishopric  was  vested.  His  election 
to  it  was  sharply  contested.  It  seems  to  have  been 
decided  in  his  favour  by  a  single  vote,  that  of  one  of 
the  suffragans,  Gregory,  Bishop  of  Nazianzus,  father 
of  Basil's  friend.  The  veteran  Bishop  not  merely 
wrote  letters  to  the  other  comprovincial  Bishops  in  his 
favour,  but,  though  enfeebled  by  old  age  and  infirmity, 
and,  as  his  son  says,  like  "  a  corpse  carried  on  a  bier," 
went  in  person  from  Nazianzus  to  Caesarea,  and  so 
carried  the  election.  In  him  it  was  seen,  as  his  son 
expresses  it,  that  in  a  good  cause  "fatigue  gives 
health,  zeal  raises  the  dead  to  life,  and  old  ag-e 
leaps  with  alacrity,  being  anointed  by  the  Holy 
Ghost."  3 

Basil,  torn.  ii.  pp.  62 — 72. 
2  Basil,  Epist.  76,  99,  120—122.     Palmer's  Origines,  p.  45. 
«  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xliii.  p.  800.     Cf.  the  similar  words   of  Gregory 


240      Territorial  divisions  of  the  Roman  E?npi7'e,  and 
Christia?i  Church. 
By  promoting  the  election  of  Basil,  the  great  cham- 
pion of  the  Faith,  to  the  throne   of  Caesarea,  Gregory 
nobly  retrieved  his  subscription  to  the  heretical  form 
of  Rimini. 

It  may  be  convenient  here  for  the  reader  to  remem- 
ber what  the  territorial  arrangements  for  the  exercise 
of  Ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  were  at  this  time. 

Providentially  the  civil  divisions  of  the  Empire  had 
been  prepared  and  preadjusted  for  those  of  the 
Church. 

The  Empire  had  been  divided  into  thirteen  large 
districts  called  Dioceses.  This  word  was  adopted  by 
the  Church,  and  was  applied  Ecclesiastically  in  the 
fourth  century  to  a  large  territorial  area  conterminous 
with  the  civil  Diocese. 

The  thirteen  Dioceses  of  the  Empire  were  sub- 
divided into  about  a  hundred  and  eighteen  Provinces 
[eirapx^cLi)',  and  this  word  was  also  adopted  by  the 
Church  in  a  similar  manner. 

These  Provinces  were  again  subdivided  into  smaller 
districts  called  irapoLKiai  {pm^oecicE) ;  and  this  word  was 
also  adopted  by  the  Church,  and  was  applied  to  an 
ecclesiastical  district,  administered  by  a  Bishop,  which 
is  now  called  a  Diocese,  but  is  carefully  to  be  distin- 


his  son  on  the  same  subject,  Orat.  xviii.  p.  357,  "Because  it  was 
requisite  that  Basil's  ordination  should  be  canonical,  and  one  Bishop 
was  lacking  to  the  number  of  those  who  were  to  elect  him,  he,  although 
broken  by  old  age  and  sickness,  tears  himself  from  his  couch,  and  sets 
forth  youthfully  on  his  journey  to  the  city  ;  thinking  that  he  would  only 
arrive  there  as  a  corpse  on  a  bier,  but  would  so  testify  his  zeal  :  but 
wonderful  to  say,  he  gains  vigour  by  toil,  he  gets  youth  by  alacrity,  he 
manages  the  matter,  he  places  himself  as  a  soldier  by  Basil's  side,  and 
places  him  on  his  Episcopal  throne,  and  returns  home  not  oii  a  bier,  but 
as  it  were  on  a  sacred  Ark." 


Territorial  divisions  of  the  Church.  241 

guished  from  the  Diocesis  of  the  fourth  century,  which 
was  of  far  greater  extent. 

The  head  of  the  ancient  ecclesiastical  Diocesis  of 
the  fourth  century  was  an  Exarch,  ox  Archbishopy  and 
sometimes  called  a  Patriarch. 

Such  a  personage  was  S.  Basil,  Exarch  of  Caesarea 
in  Cappadocia,  and  Primate  of  the  Provinces  of  Pon- 
tus,  Paphlagonia,  and  Armenia.* 

The  head  of  the  EparcJiia  or  Province  was 
designated  a  Metropolitan.  The  Bishop  was  subordi- 
nate— not  in  order,  but  in  jurisdiction — to  the  Metro- 
politan of  the  Province,  and  the  Metropolitan  was 
subordinate  in  jurisdiction  to  the  Patriarch  ;  and  there 
was  a  graduated  scale  of  Appeals  upward  from  the 
Bishop  to  the  Metropolitan,  and  from  him  to  the 
Patriarch.^ 

But  to  return. 

Basil  was  consecrated  in  the  autumn  of  A.D.  370. 
A  contested  election  to  an  Episcopal  See  raises  often 
a  tempest  of  troubles.     Much  more  would  this  be  the 

*  Basil's  '^ Diocesis"  (the  centre  of  which  was  Coesarea)  contained 
eleven  Provinces  [itrapx^as),  as  follows  : — 

Province.  Metropolis. 

Galatia Ancyra. 

Bithynia Nicomedia. 

Cappadocia  ima   .....  Csesarea. 

Cappadocia  2nda Tyana. 

Honorias Claudiopolis. 

Paphlagonia Gangra. 

Pontus  Polemoniacus     ....  Neo-Caesarea. 

Helenopontus Amasea. 

Armenia  ima        .....  Sebaste. 

Armenia  2nda       .....  Melitene. 

Galatia  Salutaris Pessinus. 

See  Bingham,  ix.  c.  i  and  c.  3. 

*  For  the  authorities  on  this  subject,  see  Bingham,  book  ix.  c.  I  and 
C.2;  Gieseler,  i.  §  93,  note  4  ;  Theophilus  Anglicanus,  part  i.  ch.  xii. 

VOL.   II.  R 


242  BasiVs  election — Eustathius  of  Sehaste. 

case  with  a  contested  election  to  the  high  position  of 
Archbishop,  or  rather,  as  he  was  called,  Exarch,  of 
such  an  extensive  group  of  provinces  as  that  of 
Caesarea,  containing  so  many  Suffragan  Bishops. 
His  own  uncle,  Gregory,  one  of  his  suffragans,  sided 
with  his  opponents.  Eustathius,  Bishop  of  Sebaste  in 
Lesser  Armenia,  who  at  first  had  sent  delegates  to 
congratulate  him,^  turned  round  against  him,  and 
never  gave  him  a  moment's  rest.^  Eustathius  had 
been  a  scholar  of  Arius,^  but  being  condemned  by 
Hermogenes,  Bishop  of  Csesarea,  he  recanted,  and 
was  ordained  by  him  ;  he  afterwards  allied  himself 
with  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  and  then  joined  himself 
openly  to  the  Arians.  However,  he  contrived  to 
recommend  himself  to  Pope  Liberius  at  Rome,  and 
was  restored  in  the  Synod  of  Tyana.  He  made 
a  show  of  sanctity  and  asceticism,  and  zeal  for  the 
monastic  life,  and  was  kindly  received  by  Basil,  on  his 
subscription  to  the  Creed  of  Nicaea,  A.D.  373.^  Then 
he  started  back  like  a  broken  bow,  and,  in  order  to 
gratify  the  Arians,  wrote  scurrilous  letters  against 
Basil,^  to  which,  after  a  three  years'  silence,  Basil 
replied  ^  in  an  Apologia  which  may  be  compared  to 
those  of  Athanasius. 

Basil's  former  connexion  with  Eustathius,  whose 
disciples  became  notorious  for  their  wild  extrava- 
gances, was  however  made  one  of  the  principal 
charges  against  him. 

It  is  probable  that  the  disciplinarian  Council  of 


«  Basil,  Epist.  223  ;  cp.  105,  109. 

'  On  the  history  of  Eustathius  and  his  relations  with  Basil,  see  Maran, 
vit.  Basil,  p.  cxxv. 
*  Basil,  Epist.  249,  263.  ^  Epist.  125. 

1  Epist.  130.  2  Epist.  126,  129,  223. 


Council  of  Gangra — On  Marriage.  243 

Gangra^    in    Paphlagonia*     was    held    about    that 
time. 

That  Council  of  Gangra  was  summoned  for  the 
purpose  of  condemning  the  doctrines  and  practices 
of  Eustathius,^  and  of  his  followers,  who  were  de- 
praving the  Church  by  heresy,  and  distracting  it 
by  schism. 

It  was  probably  held  in  a  late  period  of  the  Epis- 
copate of  Basil,^  when  Eustathius  had  broken  away 
from  him,  and  was  in  open  hostility  to  him  and  to  the 
Nicene  Faith.  It  was  presided  over  by  Eusebius,  who 
may  perhaps  have  been  the  same  as  Basil's  staunch 
friend,^  the  celebrated  Bishop  of  Samosata,  the  capi- 
tal of  Commagene  on  the  Euphrates,  and  Martyr. 
Eustathius  ceased  to  be  Bishop  of  Sebaste  in  A.D. 
380,  the  year  after  S.  Basil,  and  was  succeeded  in  his 
see  by  Basil's  brother  Peter,  a  circumstance  which 
seems  to  show  the  opinion  of  the  electors  on  the 
differences  between  Eustathius  and  Basil. 

The  Council  of  Gangra  condemned  the  Eustathians 
for  their  hyper-asceticism  in  the  disparagement  of 
Marriage,  and  in  separating  wives  from  husbands 
on   the   plea   of  zeal  for  continency ;  for  detaching 

5  See  the  Canons  in  Concil.  General,  ii.  415;  Mansi,  ii.  1095; 
Concil.  Bruns.  106  ;  Maran,  Vit.  Basil,  p.  Ii.;  and  Beveridge,  Synodic. 
i.  415,  with  the  comments  of  Zonaras  and  Balsamon. 

4  The  Synodical  Letter  is  "to  the  fellow- Bishops  of  Armenia." 
»  oi    irepl  EixTTadiov  means  Eustathius  himself  as   well   as  his  fol- 
lowers.    Cp.  Socr.  ii.  43  ;  Sozom.  iv.  24. 

6  Mr.  Ffoulkes  (in  Archdn.  Cheetham's  Dictionary),  i.  709,  places  it 
as  early  as  A.D.  358. 

7  This  is  the  conjecture  of  the  learned  writer  of  the  article  in  Pro- 
fessor Wace's  Dictionary,  ii.  371.  Eusebius  was  alive  in  A.D.  379, 
when  his  name  was  subscribed  to  Decrees  of  the  Council  of  Antioch. 
Hefele,  Concilien-Geschichte,  i.  pp.  777— 79i>  leaves  its  date  uncer- 
tain. 

R   2 


244       Canons  of  Gangra  against  excessive  asceticism. 

slaves  from  their  masters,  and  children  from  their 
parents,  on  pretence  of  religion  ;  for  administering 
tonsure  to  women  ;  for  allowing  women  to  wear  the 
apparel  of  men  ;  for  the  prohibition  of  certain  meats  ; 
for  their  censorious  condemnation  of  the  ordinary- 
clerical  dress  ;  ^  for  refusing  to  communicate  with 
those  priests  who  cohabited  with  their  wives ;  for 
making  separate  congregations,  and  for  inducing  men 
to  leave  their  own  Churches,  and  to  communicate  at 
home  ;  for  instituting  fasts  of  their  own,  at  variance 
with  the  fasts  of  the  Church.^ 

"We  make  these  decrees  (says  the  Council)  not 
because  we  shut  out  from  the  Church  any  who  desire 
to  be  ascetics  according  to  the  Scriptures  ;  but  be- 
cause we  blame  those  who  make  asceticism  a  pretext 
for  arrogance,and  exalt  themselves  against  simple  men, 
and  introduce  innovations  contrary  to  the  Scriptures 
and  Canons  of  the  Church.  We  acknowledge  Vir- 
ginity to  be  a  holy  thing,  when  chosen  for  piety's 
sake  ;  and  we  also  honour  chaste  cohabitation  in  mar- 
riage. We  commend  plainness  of  dress,  and  we  do  not 
approve  dissolute  attire  and  demeanour.  We  reve- 
rence God's  house,  and  the  assemblies  in  it  as  holy 
and  profitable,  but  we  do  not  confine  godliness  to 
special  buildings  ;  and  we  praise  excellence  in  good 
deeds  to  the  brethren  and  to  the  poor.  In  a  word, 
we  pray  that  all  things  may  be  done  in  the  Church  as 

*  The  Eustathians  condemned  ^-ripovs,  birrhos,  which  were  short 
tippets  with  sleeves,  covering  the  shoulders  and  arms  (see  Labbe, 
Concil.  11.  p.  433,  Canon  I2,  and  Bingham,  vi,  4.  19),  over  the  tunic ; 
those  of  the  Clergy  being  of  linen  or  cloth,  those  of  Bishops  being  silk. 
The  Eustathians  censured  these  dresses  as  contrasted  with  the  monastic 
f  allium,  or  cloak,  which  they  assumed. 

^  For  a  useful  commentary  on  these  decrees,  see  Hefele,  Concilien, 
i-  P-  779 


Basil's  Canonical  Epistles— On  Marriage  with  a      245 
Wife's  sister. 
they  have  been  deUvered  to  us  by  the  Holy  Scriptures 
and  by  the  ApostoHc  traditions." 

If  we  consider  the  relation  of  Gangra  to  Caesarea, 
and  the  relation  of  Eustathius  of  Sebaste  to  Basil, 
we  may  perhaps  be  disposed  to  think  that  this  Council 
of  Gangra  was  under  Basil's  influence,  and  that  it 
intended  to  remove  from  him  the  obloquy  which,  on 
account  of  his  known  prepossessions  in  favour  of 
asceticism  and  monastic  institutions,  he  was  not 
unlikely  to  have  incurred,  by  reason  of  his  connexion 
with  Eustathius. 

It  is  remarkable  that  we  have  no  record  of  any 
provincial  or  diocesan  Synod  held  by  Basil  himself 
during  the  ten  years  of  his  Episcopate.  This  probably 
arose  from  the  disjointed  state  of  his  Province  at  that 
time.  The  consequence  was  that  he  was  constrained 
to  exercise  discipline  by  his  own  archiepiscopal 
authority. 

The  Episcopate  of  S.  Basil  has  a  peculiar  interest 
in  this  respect,  that  he  dealt  with  many  questions  of 
Church  discipline  as  well  as  of  doctrine.  He  did  this 
specially  in  those  three  Epistles  which  are  called 
"  Canonical;'  and  in  which  he  determines  questions  of 
discipline  according  to  the  Canon  of  Law  of  the 
Eastern  Church.^ 

One  of  the  earliest  exercises  of  Basil's  archiepisco- 
pal authority  was  seen  in  the  prohibition  of  "  Marriage 
with  a  deceased  wife's  sister."  In  a  letter  on  this 
subject,  he  says,'  "  Our  received  usage  is,  according 
to  the  rule  delivered  to  us  by  holy  men,  that  if  any 
one  has  contracted  the  illicit  marriage  of  two  sisters, 
such  a  connexion  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  marriage, 

1  On  these  Canonical  Epistles  more  will  be  said  in  pp.  259.  260. 

2  See  Epist.  160  to  Diodorus,  and  below,  p.  262. 


246         On  the  Godliead  of  the  Holy  Ghost — Simony. 

Chorepiscopi, 
nor  are  the  parties  to  be  admitted  to  communion  in 
the  Church,  before  they  are  separated."^ 

On  the  important  question  of  doctrine — the  God- 
head of  the  Holy  Ghost — he  affirmed,  in  an  Epistle'' 
written  about  the  same  time,  that  he  adheres  to  the 
Creed  of  Nicaea  ;  but  that,  on  account  of  a  heresy  which 
had  lately  sprung  up  (that  of  the  Macedonians  or 
Pnetmtaioinachi,  or  "  fighters  against  the  Spirit "),  it 
was  requisite  that  an  Article  should  be  added  to  the 
Creed,  declaratory  of  the  divinity  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Thus  he  anticipated  the  action  of  the  Council  of 
Constantinople  afterwards  held  in  A.D.  381. 

On  account  of  the  remissness  of  former  Exarchs  of 
Csesarea,  much  laxity  prevailed  in  its  Provinces  with 
regard  to  Ordination.  Basil  issued  severe  laws  against 
Simoniacal  practices  in  the  collation  of  holy  orders.^ 
The  numerous  CJiorepiscopi,  or  Country  Bishops,  of 
the  Province,^  had  assumed  to  themselves  the  function 
of  ordaining  Priests  and  Deacons  without  the  consent 
of  the  Metropolitans ;  and  thus  many  unv/orthy  per- 
sons had  been  admitted  to  the  ministry,  in  order  to 
escape  military  service,  and  for  the  sake  of  immunities 
from  taxation.  Whether  all  these  Chorepiscopi  had 
themselves  received  Episcopal  consecration  does  not 
clearly  appear.  Basil  applied  vigorous  measures  for 
the  correction  of  these  abuses.*^ 

In  the  year  371,  Basil's  brother  Gregory  was  con- 
secrated to  the  See  of  Nyssa  in  Cappadocia,  and  thus 
became  one  of  Basil's  Suffragans  ;  and  about  this  time 
his  uncle  Gregory,  another  of  his  Suffragans,  who  had 
been  one  of  his  opponents,  was  reconciled  to  him. 

3  Cp.  Epist.  217,  Canon  78.  '»  Epist.  259.  *  Epist.  53. 

^  There  were  fifty  Chorepiscopi  in  Basil's  diocesis.  See  Bingham, 
ix.  3.  2.  '  Epist.  54. 


Basil's  appeal  to  the  IV est  for  sympaiJiy  and  help.     247 

Basil  now  turned  his  eyes  from  his  own  archi- 
episcopal  charge  to  the  affairs  of  the  entire  Eastern 
Church.  The  time  had  need  of  him.  Persecution 
was  raging  against  it.  Heresy  was  rampant.  The 
Church  was  torn  by  divisions.  "The  whole  East 
(he  says  ®  in  a  letter  to  Damasus,  Bishop  of  Rome),  in 
all  countries  from  Illyricum  to  Egypt,  is  swept  by  a 
storm.  Arianism  is  dominant ;  the  standard-bearers 
of  the  faith  in  every  diocese  have  been  ejected  from 
their  Churches  through  false  accusations  and  wrong, 
and  the  management  of  affairs  is  delivered  to  others, 
who  lead  captive  the  souls  of  the  simple." 

He  therefore  appeals  for  help  to  the  Bishop  of 
Rome.  "We  had  hoped,"  he  adds,  "for  voluntary 
overtures  from  you  ;  but  as  we  have  been  disap- 
pointed in  this  expectation,  we  now  conjure  you  by 
letter  to  come  to  our  rescue  with  your  counsel  and 
aid,  in  this  distress  of  our  Churches.'^ 

In  another  letter^  written  at  the  same  time,  ad- 
dressed to  his  "  brethren  the  Bishops  of  the  West," 
by  whom  some  encouragement  had  been  given  in  a 
reply  to  Athanasius  (whom,  as  we  have  seen,^  Basil 
had  enlisted  in  the  same  cause),  he  says,  "  Our 
calamities  are  notorious,  and  the  sound  of  them  is 
gone  out  into  all  the  world.  The  doctrines  of  our 
Fathers  are  scorned  ;  Apostolic  traditions  are  set  at 
nought  ;  novel  human  inventions  are  rife  in  our 
Churches  ;  men  are  technologists,  not  theologians  ; 
worldly  wisdom  reigns  supreme,  and  thrusts  away  the 
glorying  of  the  Cross  ;  the  Shepherds  are  driven  from 
the  fold;  grievous  wolves  are  brought  into  it  in  their 
stead,  and  tear  the  flock  of  Christ.     Houses  of  prayer 

^  In  Epist.  70,  written  probably  in  372. 

'  Epist.  90.  1  See  above,  pp.  224,  225, 


248     Basil's  pathetic  appeals  to  Dam  a  sits  and  the  West. 

are  bereft  of  preachers  ;  the  deserts  are  full  of  mourners. 
If  there  is  in  you,  therefore,  any  consolation  of  love, 
any  fellowship  of  the  Spirit,  any  bowels  of  mercies, 
bestir  yourselves,  and  come  to  our  aid.  Rescue  us  from 
the  storm.  Let  the  good  Word  preached  by  our  fathers 
be  freely  spoken,  which  overthrows  the  infamous  heresy 
of  Arius,  and  builds  up  the  Church  with  sound  doctrine, 
in  which  the  Son  is  confessed  to  be  consubstantial 
with  the  Father  ;  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  together  with 
them,  is  worshipped  with  equal  honour  ;  in  order  that 
through  your  prayers  and  co-operation  the  Lord  may 
grant  us  grace  to  glory  in  the  confession  of  the  divine 
and  life-giving  Trinity."  ^ 

He  also  speaks  "*  thus  to  the  Bishops  of  Italy  and 
Gaul :  "  Ye  are  disciples  of  the  Lord.  Therefore  deem 
our  afflictions  to  be  your  own.  Mourn  with  us  in  our 
mourning,  ye  who  love  your  brethren.  The  mouths 
of  the  pious  are  stopped  ;  those  of  blasphemers  against 
God  are  opened.  Do  not  think  merely  of  your  own 
happy  condition,^  ye  who  are  safely  moored  in  a  calm 
harbour,  and  are  sheltered  by  God's  grace  from  the 
hurricane ;  but  stretch  forth  your  hands  to  our 
Churches  which  are  tempest-tossed,  lest  they  suffer 
shipwreck  of  the  faith.  Weep  for  us.  The  One- 
begotten  is  blasphemed  ;  the  Holy  Spirit  is  rejected, 
and  is  not  allowed  to  complete  the  Holy  Trinity,  nor 
to  be  sharer  of  the  Divine  Nature." 

Such  were  Basil's  pathetic  appeals  to  Damasus, 
Bishop  of  Rome,  and  to  other  Bishops  of  the  West. 
He  had  been  seconded  by  Athanasius  at  Alexandria 

2  Phil.  ii.  I. 

3  See  also  Basil's  letters  to  the  same  effect,  Epist.  92  and  242. 
-*  Epist.  243. 

*  Under  Valentinian,  the  orthodox  Emperor  of  the  West. 


Basil  disappointed  by  tlieir  failure.  249 

almost  with  his  dying  breath.^  And  after  his  death 
Basil  addressed  many  letters,  and  sent  envoys  to  Rome  ^ 
and  the  Western  Bishops,  and  asked  them  to  supplicate 
Valentinian,  the  Emperor  of  the  West,  to  mediate  on 
behalf  of  the  Eastern  Church  with  his  brother  Valens. 
But  no  help  came  from  the  West.  In  A.D.  375 
Basil  was  almost  in  despair.  "  No  impression  for 
good  can  be  made  on  one  "  (meaning  Pope  Damasus  ") 
"  who  is  highly  exalted  and  sits  aloft,  and  is  not  able 
to  hear  the  voice  of  those  who  speak  the  truth  from 
the  ground.  What  good  can  conference  with  such  a 
man  do  to  any  of  us  who  shrink  from  servile  flattery  ? " 
And  again  in  A.D.  376  (in  a  letter  to  his  friend 
Eusebius,  Bishop  of  Samosata)  Basil  says  that  their 
condition  is  like  that  of  the  Jews  in  their  captivity. 
Orthodox  Bishops  were  ejected,  and  heretics  placed  in 
their  sees.  His  own  brother  Gregory  was  expelled 
from  Nyssa,  and  a  venal  slave  placed  in  his  room.  He 
mentions  similar  examples  in  Armenia  and  Syria. 
"  And  whither  are  we  to  turn  }  I  send  two  envoys  to 
Rome,  Dorotheus  and  Sanctissimus,  but  what  hope 
have  we  there  1  I  bethink  me  of  Diomed's  words  in 
Homer  ^  (to  Agamemnon),  ^  Would  to  heaven  you 
had  not  prayed  to  him  (Achilles)  ;  the  man  is  proud.' 
Haughty  tempers  become  haughtier  when  they  are 
implored.  If  God  has  mercy  on  us,  we  need  no  other 
aid  ;  but  if  He  is  angry  with  us,  what  kind   of  help 


«  See  Basil,  Epist.  69,  93,  133,  163. 

^  See  Epist.  239,  242,  243,  written  in  A.D.  376,"  the  thirteenth  year  of 
the  persecution ;"  and  Epist.  253,  263  ;  Maran,  Vit.  Bas.  pp.  clx,  clxv. 

8  Epist.  215. 

3  Iliad  ix.  698.  A  specimen  this  of  Basil's  familiarity  with  classical 
authors,  and  of  his  manner  of  refreshing  his  mind  and  relieving  the 
gravity  of  serious  subjects  with  classical  quotations. 


250     Reciprocal  allegations  of  pride — Sympathy  of  Milan, 

can  we  receive  from  the  Western  superciliousness  ?  ^ 
They  neither  know  the  Truth,  nor  care  to  learn  it." 

Basil  taxes  Damasus,  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  with 
haughtiness  ;  and  Jerome  (once  the  Secretary  and 
always  the  friend  of  Damasus)  says  of  Basil  ^  that  "  he 
marred  his  other  gifts  and  graces  by  the  single  fault 
of  pride."  Perhaps  Basil  did  not  make  sufficient 
allowance  for  the  difficulties  by  which  Damasus  was 
surrounded,  from  the  schism  between  him  and  his 
rival  for  the  Pontificate,  Ursinus,  which  was  not  yet 
healed,^  and  from  the  moral  and  spiritual  depravity  of 
his  Clergy,  which  is  portrayed  by  no  one  more  gra- 
phically, nor  denounced  more  vehemently,  than  by 
S.  Jerome.*  Their  selfishness  was  not  likely  to  be 
stirred  by  appeals  from  the  East,  however  pathetic  ; 
and  their  callous  hard-heartedness  was  soon  afterwards 
punished  by  the  scourge  of  the  Gothic  invasion,  and 
the  pillage  of  Rome. 

The  honour  which  might  have  been  won  by  the 
Pontifical  city  passed  from  Rome  to  Milan.  After 
the  plaintive  appeals  of  Basil  and  of  the  Easterns 
to  the  deaf  ear  of  Damasus,  we  are  cheered  by  Basil's 
loving  words  to  Ambrose,  raised  from  the  Consular 
Magistracy  of  Liguria  and  Emilia  to  the  See  of 
Milan,  by  the  voice  of  the  people,  and  by  the  influence 


1  Epist.  239.  Literally  "from  the  Western  eyebrow" — Troia  fiorjdeia 
i]iuv  Tjjs  Zviucris  ocppvos ;     See  also  Epist.  242,  243, 

2  S.  Jerome,  Chron.  A.D.  380,  "  Basilins  CcTSsariensis  Episcopus 
Cappadocise  clarus  habetur— qui  multa  continentiDe  et  ingenii  bona 
uno  superbice  malo  perdidit." 

3  It  was  still  rife  in  A.D.  378,  and  gave  occasion  to  the  Council  of 
Rome  in  that  year.     Concil.  General,  ii.  p.  looi. 

4  On  the  alleged  pride  of  Basil,  and  on  the  character  of  the  Roman 
Clergy,  as  depicted  by  Jerome,  see  the  statements  in  Gibbon,  ch.  xxv. 
pp.  269—276,  and  S.  Jerome  par  M.  Thierry,  Paris,  1867,  pp.  4—24. 


S.  Basil's  letter  to  S.  Ambrose  on  his  consec7'ation>      251 

of  the  brother  of  Valens,  Valentinian,^  in  the  place  of 
the  Arian  Bishop  Auxentius,  who  had  formerly  been 
supported  by  that  Emperor. 

In  an  Epistle  ^  written  in  A.D.  375,  to  Ambrose,  from 
whom  he  had  received  a  letter,  Basil  says,  "  Great  and 
numberless  are  the  blessings  we  enjoy  from  the  Lord. 
One  of  the  greatest  is,  that  we,  who  are  widely  separated 
from  each  other  by  distance,  can  converse  freely  by  let- 
ters. Inasmuch  then  as  we  have  known  thee,  not  from 
the  outward  form  of  thy  person,  but  from  the  beauty  of 
thy  words,  we  have  glorified  our  God,  who  in  every  age 
chooses  those  who  are  pleasing  to  Him  ;  who  enabled 
David,  the  shepherd,  to  become  a  king  of  His  people  ; 
and  who  raised  Amos  from  a  goatherd  to  be  a  prophet 
inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost;  and  who  now  has  drawn 
from  the  royal  city  (Milan)  one  who  had  been  en- 
trusted with  the  rule  of  the  whole  nation  ;  one  who  is 
of  a  lofty  soul,  and  stands  conspicuous  in  the  eyes  of 
the  world,  by  the  splendour  of  his  family,  the  lustre 
of  his  life,  the  energy  of  his  eloquence,  and  who  has 
now  been  entrusted  with  the  care  of  the  folds  of  Christ's 
sheep  ;  one  who  has  cast  away  all  worldly  advantages, 
and  counts  them  loss  in  order  to  win  Christ,  and  has 
been  commissioned  to  take  into  his  hands  the  helm  of 
the  grand  ship,  famous  for  its  faith  in  God — the  Church 
of  Christ.  Therefore,  O  man  of  God,  be  thou  strong 
and  very  courageous  ;  be  thou  up  and  doing.  Since 
thou  hast  not  received  the  Gospel  of  Christ  from  men, 
nor  been  taught  it ;  but  the  Lord  Himself  has  trans- 
lated thee  from  the  judicial  bench  of  this  world  to  the 
chair  of  the  holy  Apostles,  fight  the  good  fight  of 
faith,  heal  the  sicknesses  of  the  people.  Wherever 
the  disease  of  the  Arian   madness  has   infected  any, 

*  Sozom.  vi.  21.  6  Epist.  197.     Cp.  Sozom.  vi.  21. 


252  Athanasius  survived  in  Basil ;  Basil  in  Ambrose — 

Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghost — Doxology. 
renew  the  primitive  footsteps  of  the  fathers  ;  and  on 
the  foundation  of  love  to  us,  which  thou  hast  already 
laid,  raise  a  superstructure  by  the  frequency  of  thy 
greetings  ;  that  so,  though  far  removed  in  our  earthly 
abodes,  we  may  dwell  together  as  neighbours  in  the 
Spirit  of  God." 

Athanasius,  when  about  to  depart  this  life,  greeted 
Basil  on  his  ordination  to  the  Episcopate  ;  and  now 
Basil,  whose  course  was  near  its  end  when  he  wrote 
this  letter,  saluted  Ambrose,  the  future  champion  of 
the  true  faith  against  Arianism  in  the  West.  The 
spirit  of  Athanasius  survived  in  Basil,  and  it  passed 
from  Basil  to  Ambrose ;  and  Basil  found  sympathy 
at  Milan,  which  he  had  sought  in  vain  at  Rome. 

Let  us  now  revert  to  an  earlier  period  in  the  history. 

In  A.D.  371,  Basil  was  accused  by  some  as  denying 
the  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  as  conniving 
at  the  Macedonian  heresy  by  his  reticence  on  that 
doctrine.  He  refuted  this  charge  ;  and  Athanasius 
had  reproved  its  authors  as  guilty  of  rashness  and 
wrong  in  daring  to  censure  one  whom  he  calls  "  his 
dearly  beloved  Basil,  their  Bishop,  the  servant  of 
God."7 

The  charge  against  Basil  as  to  the  form  of  the 
Doxology  sometimes  used  by  him,  was  answered  by 
himself.^  Some  persons  had  been  perplexed  because 
he  had  occasionally  said,  "Glory  to  the  Father, 
through  the  Son,  in  the  Holy  Spirit."  But  he  affirms 
that  he  used  that  form  in  no  other  sense  than  that 
which  is  expressed  in  the  words,  "  Glory  to  the 
Father,  and  to  the  Son,  and  to  the  Holy  Ghost." 

^  Palladius  apud  Maran.  p.  xcvii. 

3  Basil  de  Spiritu  Sancto,  cap.  i.— vii.     Cp.  Hooker,  V.  xlii.  9,  10. 


TJie  Emperor  Valens,  and  Prefect  Modest  us,  assail  Basil.  253 

Cappadocia  was  divided  into  two  parts  by  an  order 
of  the  Emperor  Valens  in  371.  Consequently  a 
large  part  of  it  was  severed  ecclesiastically,^  as  well  as 
civilly,  from  Caesarea,  to  the  great  prejudice  of  that 
city.  Basil's  struggle  with  Anthimus,  Bishop  of 
Tyana,  who  claimed  Metropolitical  jurisdiction  over 
that  part  which  was  severed  ;  and  the  ordination  by 
Basil  of  his  friend  Gregory  Nazianzen  to  the  See  of 
Sasima  against  his  will ;  and  Basil's  subsequent  recon- 
ciliation with  Anthimus,  and  his  friendship  with 
Gregory,  belong  rather  to  their  personal  history.* 

Valens,  having  been  successful  in  the  Gothic  war, 
pursued  his  career  from  Constantinople  towards 
Cappadocia.  He  sent  before  him  Euippius,  an 
Arian  Bishop,^  and  Modestus,  the  prefect  already 
distinguished  by  his  outrages  against  the  Catholics.^ 
Basil  refused  to  admit  Euippius  to  communion,*  and 
presented  himself  before  Modestus.^  The  Prefect 
accosted  him  thus  ;  the  narrative  of  the  dialogue  is 
from  Gregory  Nazianzen,  who  was  present  ^ :  "  Who 
art  thou,  that  alone  of  all  men  thou  darest  resist  so 
great  an  Emperor  .? "  "  What  is  the  meaning  of  that 
question,  tell  me  t  "  replied  Basil.  "  Thou  dost  not 
revere  the  Emperor's  religion,  which  all  others 
accept."  "  My  Emperor  cannot  desire  me  to  worship 
a  creature."  "  Is  it  not  a  great  thing  to  join  with 
us  .?  "  "  Certainly,  ye  are  civil  rulers,  and  illustrious  ; 
I  do  not  deny  it ;  but  ye  are  not  superior  to  God. 
Christianity  is  not  ennobled  by  dignity  of  person,  but 
by  faith."      The  Prefect  arose  from  his  seat  in  anger, 

«  Basil,  Epist.  74,  75,  98.     Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xliii.  §  58,  de  Basilio. 
1  See  ibid.  2  Epist.  69.  3    See  above,  p.  232. 

■^  Epist.  128.  5  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xx. 

^  Ibid.  Orat.  xliii.  p.  806.     Cp.  Theodoret,  iv.  r6. 


254  Basil  and  the  Prefect  Modest  us. 

and  replied,  "Dost  thou  not  fear  this  power  of 
ours  ? "  ''  Wherefore  should  I  fear  it  ?  What  will 
happen  to  me  if  I  do  not  ?  What  shall  I  suffer  ?  " 
"What  wilt  thou  suffer  ?  One  of  these  things  :  con- 
fiscation of  thy  goods,  banishment,  torture,  death." 
"  None  of  these  things  affect  me.  Confiscation  of 
goods  cannot  harm  one  who  has  nothing  except  some 
worn-out  robes  and  a  few  books.  Banishment  I  know 
not,  because  I  am  not  confined  to  earth,  and  do  not 
think  the  ground  on  which  I  tread  to  be  mine  ;  the 
Earth  is  the  Lord's,  I  am  only  a  sojourner  on  it. 
And  how  can  tortures  reach  me,  except  the  first 
stroke  of  them,  since  I  have  a  body  that  will  not  bear 
them  }  Death  will  be  a  boon  to  me.  I  shall  be  sooner 
with  the  Lord,  for  Whom  I  live,  and  to  Whom  I  hasten 
to  go.  In  all  other  things,  O  Prefect,  we  are  mild 
and  gentle  ;  for  our  laws  forbid  us  to  behave  proudly, 
not  only  to  the  Emperor,  but  to  any  one  however 
lowly;  but  when  God  commands  us,  we  look  at  Him 
alone.  Fire,  the  sword,  wild  beasts,  hooks  that  tear 
our  flesh — these  are  our  joy  rather  than  our  fear. 
Report  this  to  the  Emperor." 

The  Prefect  retired,  and  said  to  the  Emperor, 
**  We  are  conquered.  No'  threats  or  blandishments 
affect  him.  You  must  try  force,  or  not  expect  him 
to  yield." 

To  this  account  some  addition  is  made  by  the 
Church-historian,  Theodoret.''  ''Why,"  said  the 
Prefect,  "  do  you  expose  so  many  Churches  to  danger 
for  the  sake  of  a  little  nicety  of  dogma  } "  "  They 
who  are  trained  in  divine  learning,"  replied  Basil, 
"dare  not  surrender  a  single  iota  of  those  sacred 
dogmas,  but  welcome  all  kinds  of  death  rather  than 

7  Theodoret,  iv.  17. 


The  Emperor  Valens  in  the  Cathedral  of  Ccesarea  255 
when  Basil  was  celebrafit. 
do  so."  "  Thou  art  mad."  "  Yes,  and  may  I  always 
be  thus  mad."  "  Come  again  to-morrow,"  said  the 
Prefect  with  threats,  *^and  let  me  know  your  mind." 
"  I  will  come  to-morrow,  and,  if  you  will^  then  execute 
your  threats." 

After  Modestus  had  reported  to  the  Emperor  the 
result  of  his  interview  with  Basil,  Valens,  who  was 
timorous  ^  as  well  as  wilful,  and  did  not  wish  to  risk 
a  conflict  with  Basil,  or  to  appear  to  be  vanquished  by 
him,  told  the  Prefect  that  he  had  exceeded  his  com- 
mission in  attempting  to  terrify  Basil  with  menaces, 
and  that  he  desired  to  be  on  friendly  terms  with  the 
Bishop  of  Caesarea,  and  would,  with  his  imperial 
suite,  be  among  the  worshippers  at  the  Cathedral  on 
the  Festival  of  the  Epiphany,  A.D.  372. 

Gregory  Nazianzen — who  was  then  at  Caesarea,  and 
a  portion  of  whose  narrative  has  been  already  quoted 
— thus  describes  what  occurred  :  ^ — 

"  When  the  Emperor  was  within  the  Church,  and 
when  his  ears  rang  with  the  sound  of  the  Psalms,  as 
with  a  peal  of  thunder ;  and  when  he  saw  the  sea 
of  people  present,  and  the  almost  angelic  order  and 
decency  of  divine  worship,  in  the  Sacrarium,  and 
outside  it ;  and  the  Bishop  standing  erect  like  a 
pillar  before  the  people — as  Samuel  is  described  in 
Scripture — and  not  moving  his  body,  his  eye,  or  his 
mind,  in  any  direction,  as  if  nothing  had  occurred, 
but  wholly  riveted  on  God  and  on  the  altar ;  ^  and 


8  Above,  p.  230.  *  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xliii.  pp.  805 — 809. 

^  Hence,  as  has  been  remarked,  it  appears  that  in  some  ancient 
Churches,  at  the  Holy  Communion,  the  Celebrant  looked  over  the  altar 
with  his  face  towards  the  people.  See  De  Broglie,  L'Eglise,  &c.,  v. 
pp.  loi  and  97,  and  ii.  pp.  170 — 173.  And  this  is  now  the  case  at 
Rome  in  S.  Peter's  Church,  and  in  the  Church  at  Ravenna.     **  Altars" 


256  Valens  and  Basil. 

when  he  also  saw  those  who  were  around  him  stand- 
ing with  fear  and  reverence,  he  felt  his  human  weak- 
ness, and  was  seized  with  a  sudden  dizziness  and 
darkness  ;  and  when  the  offerings  were  to  be  made 
by  him,  which  he  had  prepared  for  the  altar,  and  no, 
one  stepped  forward  to  receive  them  at  his  hands 
and  it  was  not  sure  that  Basil  would  accept  them, 
then  he  began  to  totter,  and  would  have  fallen  to 
the  ground,  if  he  had  not  been  held  up  by  the  hand 
of  one  of  the  ministers." 

The  Emperor  came  a  second  time  to  the  Church  ; 
and  then  Basil  received  his  offerings,  and  invited 
him  within  the  curtains  to  the  place  where  he  was 
sitting,  and  discoursed  with  him  on  the  true  faith.' 
It  is  said  that  Valens  was  much  affected  by  the 
death  of  his  child  at  Caesarea,  whom  he  had  al- 
lowed to  be  baptized  by  an  Arian  against  Basil's 
advice.  But  afterwards,  fickle  as  he  was,  he  was 
incited  by  some  Arian  counsellors  to  condemn  Basil 
to  exile,  and  had  resolved  to  do  so,  but  was  deterred 
from  his  purpose.^  Indeed,  Valens  seems  to  have 
been  so  much  impressed  with  Basil's  firmness  and 
gentleness  that  he  encouraged  him  in  the  erection  of 
a  noble  building  for  the  reception  of  poor,  strangers, 
and  sick,  in  the  suburbs  of  Caesarea.* 

(says  Bingham,  viii.  6.  ii)  "were  placed  at  some  distance  from  the 
apse  {conchuld),  or  upper  end  of  the  Chancel  {^rnxa),  with  the  Bishop's 
seat  behind  them."  See  Lelow,  p.  279,  the  words  from  the  Apostolic 
Constitutions,  and  Neander,  iii,  383.  There  is  a  remnant  of  this 
arrangement  in  the  Church  of  S.  Ambrogio  at  Milan,  and  in  the 
Cathedral  Church  of  Norwich,  and  in  the  Church  of  Stow,  near  Lincoln. 

2  Theodoret,  iv.  16. 

3  Ibid.    Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xliii.     Sozomen,  vi.  16.     Maran,  p.  ciii. 

*  Basil,  Epist.  94.  Theod.  iv.  16.  Greg.  Nyssen.  in  Basil,  p.  492. 
It  might  have  been  hoped  that  some  vestiges  would  remain  of  these 
threat  works  of  Basil,  and  also  of  the  magnificent  Church  at  Nazianzus, 


Basil's  Hospital.  257 

With  regard  to  this  pious  and  charitable  work,  we 
are  told  that  Basil  took  care  that  it  should  have  a 
handsome  Church,  and  a  residence  for  the  Bishop, 
and  be  well  supplied  with  medical  and  other  officers 
and  attendants  ;  it  had  also  a  monastery  attached 
to  it,  for  the  service  of  the  Hospital.  It  was  a  model 
to  other  hospitals  built  in  other  towns  of  the  Dio- 
cese ^  often  visited  by  the  Bishop.  In  his  replies  to 
Modestus,  Basil  had  stated  that  he  had  no  private 
property ;  this  hospital  therefore  must  have  been 
built  and  endowed  from  the  revenues  of  the  see, 
regarded  by  Basil  as  assigned  to  the  Bishop  for 
public  uses ;  and  from  the  contributions  of  the 
faithful,  as  his  friend  Gregory  relates,^  who  dwells 
specially  on  his  sympathy  with  lepers_,  and  on  his 
loving  behaviour  to  them,  kissing  them  as  brethren 
in  ChristJ 


in  which  Basil's  friend  preached,  and  which  was  built  by  Gregory's 
father  (see  below,  p.  300).  The  following  reply  to  inquiries  on  these 
points  is  from  an  enterprising  and  learned  traveller  in  that  country,  the 
Rev.  H.  F.  Tozer,  Tutor  of  Exeter  College,  Oxford,  and  Radciifie 
Travelling  Fellow  in  1870  : — 

'*  In  answer  to  the  question  about  Csesareia,  I  am  afraid  I  can  only 
say  that  all  the  buildings  of  the  early  Christian  period  have  been  swept 
away,  and  the  only  memorial  of  S.  Basil  is  his  name  attached  to  a  hill 
in  the  neighbourhood.  Eight  hundred  years  of  Saracen  and  Seljouk 
ravages  in  those  lands  did  their  work  thoroughly.  I  have  not  been  to 
Nazianzus,  but  I  believe  its  antiquities  are  in  the  same  condition.  If 
my  book  should  ever  fall  in  your  way,  you  may  be  interested  in  the 
account  of  a  valley  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Cassareia  ;  the  tufa  sides  of 
it  are  excavated  into  cells,  refectories,  and  churches,  with  elaborate 
ornament  and  frescoes  still  brilliant,  giving  evidence  of  the  existence  of 
a  very  large  mediaeval  monastic  community.  Of  the  history  of  this 
there  is  absolutely  no  trace,  but  it  is  difficult  not  to  associate  its 
existence  there  with  the  founder  of  the  ccenobite  system." 

5  Epist.  142,  143,  150. 

«  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xliii.  817,  818. 

7  As  S.  Hugh  of  Lincoln  did  in  later  days.  Magna  Vita,  pp.  162 — 164. 

VOL.    IL  S 


258    Vacillation  of  Valens — Eusebius  of  Samosata  banished. 

Valens  also  gave  other  evidence  of  his  respect  for 
Basil.  He  had  curtailed  Basil's  influence  in  Cappa- 
docia  by  dividing  it  into  two  parts  ;  but  he  made  some 
amends  by  giving  him  an  imperial  commission  to 
erect  new  sees  and  consecrate  Bishops  in  Armenia. 
This  seems  to  have  been  done  through  the  good 
offices  of  Basil's  friend,  Count  Terentius.^  His 
Episcopal  Visitation  of  that  country  was  productive 
of  much  good.  But  the  favourable  impression  pro- 
duced on  the  mind  of  Valens  was  not  of  long  dura- 
tion. On  the  death  of  Athanasius  in  the  spring  of 
A.D.  374,  the  choice  of  the  Clergy  fell  unanimously 
on  Peter,  whom  he  had  designated  as  his  successor ; 
but  Valens,  acting  under  the  instigation  of  Euzoius, 
the  Arian  Bishop  of  Antioch,  sent  Lucius  the 
heresiarch  to  supersede  Peter  ;  ^  and  the  outrages 
were  then  renewed  at  Alexandria,  which  had  pro- 
duced such  consternation  there  in  the  Episcopates  of 
his  Arian  predecessors,  Gregory  and  George  of  Cap- 
padocia. 

Basil's  friend,  Eusebius  of  Samosata,  was  also 
banished  in  this  year,  by  order  of  Valens.  The  re- 
spect of  Eusebius  for  the  imperial  authority  was 
manifested  by  the  considerate  and  ingenious  manner 
in  which  he  screened  the  officer  of  his  persecutor 
from  the  fury  of  his  loyal  and  indignant  people,^  and 
retired  quietly  into  exile  in  Thrace.  The  same 
loving  spirit  of  forgiveness  showed  itself  in  this  good 
Bishop,  when  after  the  death  of  Valens  ^  he  had  re- 
turned from  exile,  and  when  he  was  visiting  a  town 
in  his  diocese  in  order  to  consecrate  a  Bishop  there, 

«  Epist.  99. 

*  See  Theodoret,  iv,  18,  20,  21  ;  Sozom.  vi.  19,  20. 

'  See  Theodoret,  iv.  13,  *  Ibid.  v.  4. 


Basils  Canonical  Epistles — on  Baptism^and  Marriage^  &^c.  259 

and  an  Arian  woman  threw  a  large  tile  from  a  house 
on  his  head  as  he  was  passing  by,  and  fractured  his 
skull.  When  he  was  at  the  point,  of  death,  he  par- 
doned the  murderer,  and  conjured  those  who  were 
present  to  see  that  she  might  be  spared. 

The  troubles  of  the  time,  in  which  the  orthodox 
Bishops  could  not  hold  Synods  without  difficulty, 
were  mitigated  by  the  Epistles  of  Basil  called 
Cmionical  Epistles  (i.  e.  declaring  the  Canons  of  the 
Church  on  matters  of  discipline),  which  were  written 
in  reply  to  the  questions  of  Amphilochius,  Bishop  of 
Iconium.  The  first  of  these  ^  was  written  at  the  close 
of  A.D.  374;  the  second*  after  Easter,  A.D.  375  ;  and 
the  third  ^  in  the  same  year.  The  first  of  these 
Epistles  contains  16  Canons,  the  second  34,  the 
third  35. 

These  Epistles  are  interesting,  as  showing  what  the 
Canon  Law  of  the  Eastern  Church  was  at  that  time. 
Basil  does  not  profess  to  put  forth  in  them  any 
Edicts  of  his  own,  but  only  to  deliver  what  he  had 
received  by  tradition  from  former  generations.^ 

The  Epistles  deal,  among  other  questions,  with 
that  of  Heretical  Baptism,  and  declare  that  Baptism  is 
not  to  be  repeated  in  cases  where  it  is  administered 
with  the  element  of  water  in  the  name  of  the  Blessed 
Trinity  (Can.  i  and  47).  Heretics  are  to  be  received 
to  communion  i7i  articiilo  mortis,  if  penitent  (Can.  5). 

They  also  lay  down  rules  as  to  Marriage.  Poly- 
gamy is  denounced  as  bestial  (Can.  80).  Fornication 
is    strongly   condemned,    especially   in    the   Clergy 

3  Epist.  188.  4  Epist.  199. 

*  Epist.  217.  These  CaDonical  Epistles  to  Amphilochius  are  also  con- 
tained in  Bishop  Beveridge's  Synodicon,  torn.  ii.  pp.47 — 135  (ed.  Oxon. 
1672),  with  the  notes  of  Balsamon,  Zonaras,  and  Aristaenus. 

6  Epist.  188. 

S  2 


2  6o  Basil  on  marriage^  divorce,  ^c. — vows  of  ahstine?ice — 

sorcery, 
(Can.  3  and  59),  and  severely  punished.  Incestuous 
Marriages  are  to  be  punished  as  adultery.  Wilful 
abortion  is  homicide  (Can.  2,  8,  and  51).  Amatory 
philtres  are  condemned.  Marriage  with  a  deceased 
wife's  sister  is  forbidden  (Can.  23,  6Zy  and  78 ;  see 
above,  p.  245).  Carnal  connexion  with  a  half-sister 
or  a  daughter-in-law  is  to  be  severely  punished  (Can. 
75  and  ']6).  Divorce  is  not  allowed,  except  for 
fornication.  A  man  who  has  been  deserted  by  his 
wife  is  pardonable  if  he  marries  another,  but  a  man 
who  deserts  his  wife  and  marries  another  is  guilty  of 
adultery  (Can.  9).  But  a  woman  ought  not  to  marry 
another  man  till  she  is  assured  of  her  husband's 
death  (Can.  31  ;  cp.  Can.  36).  Digamists  are  not  to 
be  admitted  to  Holy  Orders  (Can.  12). 

Early  professions  of  Virginity  are  very  carefully  to 
be  scrutinized  and  controlled  (Can.  18).  A  Widow, 
who  is  maintained  by  the  Church,  is  censured  if  she 
marries  (i  Tim.  v.  11).  Such  a  widow,  who  is  sixty 
years  old,  and  who  cohabits  with  a  man,  is  not  to  be 
admitted  to  communion  till  she  separates  from  him ; 
but  if  she  has  been  admitted  among  the  widows  ot 
the  Church  before  sixty  years  of  age,  "the  fault 
(says  Basil)  is  ours,  not  hers." 

A  man  who  has  vowed  to  abstain  from  swine's 
flesh  has  done  a  silly  thing.  Such  vows  ought  not 
to  be  taken.  No  creature  of  God  is  to  be  refused, 
if  received  with  thanksgiving  (i  Tim.  iv.  4).  Men 
are  to  be  taught  that  they  should  abstain  from 
foolish  vows  and  rash  promises,  and  that  the  use 
of  God's  creatures  is  indifferent  (Can.  28).  Canon  29 
is  against  rash  vows  and  oaths. 

Canons  72  and  83  are  against  sorcery,  divination, 
and  magical  arts. 


On  frequent  co7nmunton — p7'ivate  communion.  Gregory  261 
Nyssen  on  Pilgrimages  to  the  Holy  Land. 

In  one  of  his  Epistles^  he  discusses  the  question 
of  frequent  communion  :  daily  communion  (he  says) 
is  a  good  thing ;  the  Church  of  Csesarea  does  not 
communicate  daily,  but  four  times  a  week — Sunday, 
Wednesday,  Friday,  and  Saturday — and  on  Saints' 
Days. 

In  answer  to  the  question,  whether  in  time  of  per- 
secution, and  when  the  presence  of  a  priest  or  deacon 
is  not  to  be  had,  a  person  may  receive  the  Eucharist 
already  consecrated,  he  answers  in  the  affirmative. 

These  Canonical  Letters  of  S.  Basil  may  be  fol- 
lowed by  an  Epistle  of  his  younger  brother,  Gregory, 
Bishop  of  Nyssa,  to  a  friend,  inquiring  his  opinion 
of  "  pilgrimages  to  Jerusalem."  ^  "I  went  to  Jerusa- 
lem," replies  Gregory,  ^'  because  I  had  been  summoned 
to  attend  a  Council  for  the  settlement  of  the  affairs  of 
the  Church  of  Arabia,  and  the  Emperor  put  at  my  dis- 
posal a  public  carriage  for  the  journey.  But  to  say 
the  truth,  I  was  greatly  distressed  by  what  I  saw. 
All  men  and  women  are  commanded  by  Christ  to 
lead  holy  lives,  but  they  are  not  ordered  to  go  to 
Jerusalem  ;  as  they  would  have  been,  if  a  pilgrimage 
thither  were  the  way  to  salvation.  And  if  the  divine 
grace  were  specially  vouchsafed  to  Jerusalem,  there 
would  not  be  so  much  vice  prevalent  there  as  there  is. 
In  the  inns  and  cities  on  the  way  thither  the  mind 
is  offended  by  all  kinds  of  contamination,  and  at 
Jerusalem  itself  every  sort  of  profligacy  abounds.  My 
answer  therefore  is  this :  I  confessed  Christ  to  be 
truly  God  before  I  went  to  Jerusalem.  I  knew  that 
He  was  born  of  a  Virgin  before  I  was  at  Bethlehem 

"  Epist.  93.     As  to  the  genuineness  of  this  Epistle,  see  Maran,  Vit. 
Bas.  p.  cxi. 
s  Greg.  Nyssen.  Opera,  ii.  p.  1084,  Paris,  1615. 


262   On  pilgrimages — Valentinian' s  death — Fresh  outbreak 

of  persecution. 
I  knew  that  He  had  risen  from  the  dead  before  I  saw 
the  Holy  Sepulchre,  and  that  He  had  ascended  into 
heaven  before  I  was  at  Olivet.^  But  this  I  have  learnt 
from  my  pilgrimage,  that  our  own  places  in  Cappadocia 
are  holier  than  those  of  Palestine,  for  there  is  more 
holiness  of  life  there.  Therefore,  ye  who  fear  God, 
abide  where  ye  are,  and  praise  Him  there.  Change 
of  place  will  not  bring  you  nearer  to  Him  ;  but  God 
will  come  to  you,  wherever  you  are,  if  your  soul  itself 
is  such  an  inn,  that  He  may  be  willing  to  sojourn  there  ; 
but  if  your  heart  is  full  of  evil  thoughts,  you  are  as  far 
from  having  Christ  as  your  guest,  as  one  who  knows 
nothing  of  Him,  even  though  you  are  at  Calvary,  and 
on  Olivet,  and  at  the  Holy  Sepulchre.  Therefore, 
my  dear  friend,  give  this  advice  to  our  brethren. 
Let  them  not  make  pilgrimages  from  Cappadocia  to 
Palestine,  but  let  them  so  live  at  home,  that  their 
souls,  at  their  death,  may  go  forth  from  their  bodies 
on  a  pilgrimage  to  the  Lord." 

In  A.D.  375,  November  17,  Valentinian,  the  elder 
brother  of  Valens,  and  Emperor  of  the  West,  died  by 
a  fit  of  apoplexy  ;  and  was  succeeded  by  his  two  sons, 
Gratian,  and  Valentinian  the  younger,  four  years  old, 
under  the  tutelage  of  his  Arian  mother  Justina. 

The  removal  of  Valentinian  by  death  seems  to 
have  been  followed  by  a  fresh  outbreak  of  Arian 
persecution  in  the  East.  Cappadocia  was  twice 
visited  by  Demosthenes,  the  Arian  Prefect,  Vicar  of 
Pontus,  and  in  the  second  visit  suffered  severely  from 
his  cruelties  (Epist.  231,  237,  241). 

^  So  even  Jerome  says  (Epist.  49  ad  Paullin.),  "  'Y\iQ.  places  of  Christ's 
Crucifixion  and  Resurrection  profit  only  those  who  bear  their  own 
cross,  and  rise  daily  with  Him.  Heaven  lies  open  to  us  in  Britain  as  well 
as  at  Jemsalem.     '  The  Kingdom  of  God  is  within  us.'  " 


Persecution  of  the  Church — Epiphanius  to  Basil.     263 

Gregory  Nyssen,  Basil's  brother,  was  deposed  by 
an  heretical  Synod  at  Ancyra,^  in  which  Eustathius, 
formerly  the  pretended  friend  of  Basil,  but  afterwards 
his  open  enemy,  took  a  part. 

Basil  now  broke  a  silence  of  three  years,  and  wrote 
to  Eustathius  a  letter,^  in  which  he  vindicates  himself, 
and  exposes  the  machinations  of  his  enemies. 

Another  heretical  Synod  was  held  in  A.D.  375,  at 
Nyssa,  under  the  influence  of  the  same  Eustathius, 
instigated  by  the  civil  Governor,  Demosthenes.^  The 
Bishop  of  Nyssa,  Basil's  brother  Gregory,  was  con- 
demned by  the  Arians  in  his  own  city. 

The  decrees  of  the  orthodox  Council  of  Gangra — to 
which  we  have  already  referred  as  directed  against 
Eustathius  ^ — may  have  been  designed  for  a  reprisal 
against  his  action  in  these  Arian  Synods. 

In  A.D.  376,  S.  Epiphanius,  the  learned  Bishop  of 
Salamis  in  Cyprus,  and  the  author  of  a  voluminous 
work  on  heresies,  and  also  on  the  true  faith,  appealed 
to  Basil  in  a  laudatory  letter,  expressive  of  his  entire 
confidence  in  him,  and  asking  for  his  intervention  in 
appeasing  the  schism  at  Antioch,  and  in  condemning 
the  heresy  of  Apollinarius.  S.  Basil  replied  ^  modestly, 
that  he  was  unworthy  of  such  confidence,  being 
unskilled  in  sacred  learning  and  eloquence,  and  that 
he  was  quite  content  with  the  Creed  of  Nicaea,  and 
did  not  wish  for  any  addition  to  be  made  to  it,  except 
for  the  declaration  of  the  glory  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
equally  with  that  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  ;  "an 
addition  which  is  now  necessary,"  he  adds,  "on 
account  of  the  controversy  which  has  now  been  raised 


1  Epist.  225,  237—239.       2  Epist.  226.       3  Epist.  237,  239, 244,  250. 
*  See  p.  243.  *  Epist.  258. 


264  The  term  Hypostasis  sometimes  used  as  equivalent  to 

Person. 
on  that  subject,  but  which  had  not  been  stirred  in  the 
time  of  their  forefathers  at  Nicaea.  I  am  quite 
satisfied  with  your  statement,"  says  Basil,  "  that  it  is 
necessary  to  assert  three  hypostases  ;  and  our  brethren 
at  Antioch  will,  I  hope,  be  confirmed  in  this  judg- 
ment by  you.  It  is  a  sorrowful  thing  that  the  city 
Antioch,  in  which  *  the  disciples  were  first  called 
Christians,'  should  now  be  rent  with  schisms.  As 
for  me,  I  hold  communion  with  the  most  reverend 
Bishop  and  Confessor  Meletius.  The  most  blessed 
Pope  Athanasius,  when  he  came  thither  from  Alex- 
andria, earnestly  desired  that  he  might  be  enabled  to 
communicate  with  Meletius,  but  this  was  postponed 
for  another  time,  by  the  malice  of  evil  counsellors. 
Would  to  God  it  had  not  been  so  !  "  ^ 

Many  of  the  Easterns  were  afraid  that  they  might 
seem  to  be  Sabellians,  if  they  used  the  terms  one 
hypostasis  and  three  persons ;  and  they  desired  to 
express  the  truth  that  each  Person  of  the  Trinity 
subsisted  in  a  true  hypostasis  ;  they  therefore  used 
the  term  three  hypostases.  But  many  of  the  Westerns 
shrank  from  this  term  three  hypostases^  through  fear 
of  seeming  to  be  Arians ;  because  they  translated 
hypostasis  by  substance  (not  having  a  separate  word  to 
represent  ousia),  and  they  were  content  with  the 
word /^rj-^*;/,  which  did  not  equally  approve  itself  to 
the  Easterns.  However,  as  we  have  seen,  Athanasius  ^ 
reconciled   the  two   parties,   and    declared   that   the 

*  At  this  time  there  were  three  rival  Bishops  of  Antioch — two  Catholic, 
Meletius  and  Paullinus ;  the  former  supported  by  Basil  and  the 
Easterns,  the  second  by  Rome  and  the  Westerns. 

A  third  party  was  headed  by  Vitalis  the  Apollinarian,  who  pre- 
tended to  be  also  in  communion  with  Rome  (Sozomen,  vi.  25 ; 
Theodoret,  v.  3,  4). 

^  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xxi.     See  above,  p.  222. 


S.  Basil  on  Heathefi  Litei-ature.  265 

terms  three  hypostases  and  three  persons  were  converti- 
ble, and  that  both  might  be  used  in  an  orthodox 
sense. 

Justice  would  not  be  done  to  Basil's  large-hearted- 
ness  and  many-sidedness,  if  no  reference  were  made 
to  his  intellectual  and  spiritual  relations  to  the 
Heathen  World.  No  stress  can  be  laid  on  his  sup- 
posed correspondence  with  the  Emperor  Julian,  nor 
with  the  sophist  and  rhetorician  Libanius.  These 
letters  are  of  doubtful  authority.^  But  Basil  was  in 
sympathy  with  all  the  nobler  spirits  of  Heathen 
Antiquity.  Like  the  great  masters  of  the  Alexan- 
drine School,  Clement  and  Origen,^  he  regarded 
them,  in  their  holier  moods,  as  prophets  of  universal 
humanity.  He  declared  that  God  had  never  left 
Himself  without  a  witness,  and  that  the  Poets  and 
Philosophers  of  Greece  were  pioneers  of  Christ,  and 
that  now,  when  Christianity  has  appeared,  men  are 
without  excuse,  if  they  reject  those  truths  which 
those  noble  spirits  felt  after,  and  which  they  would 
have  joyfully  and  thankfully  embraced,  if  they  had 
been  tendered  to  their  acceptance,  and  which  have 
now  been  revealed  to  the  World  in  the  Gospel.  Basil, 
in  his  treatise  "  on  reading  the  books  of  the  Gen- 
tiles," ^  addressed  to  the  young  students  at  Caesarea, 
is  something  more  than  a  wise  guide  to  the  student 
of  classical  literature ;  he  is  an  apologist  for  God  in 
His  dealings  with  the  Ancient  World. 

8  See  Maran,  Vit.  Basil,  clxxii.  One  of  Gregory  Nyssen's  letters 
(Epist.  13,  ed.  Migne,  p.  1049)  is  said  by  the  Editor  to  have  been 
addressed  to  Libanius,  and  in  that  letter  Gregory  speaks  of  the  person 
to  whom  he  writes,  as  his  brother  Basil's  instructor  in  eloquence,  as 
Basil  was  his  own  teacher  in  that  art. 

'  See  above,  vol.  i.  pp.  252,  262,  275. 

1  Basil,  torn.  ii.  173— 185,  ed.  Bened.  Paris,  1722. 


266  Basil  on  classical  studies. 

From  what  the  World  knew  and  felt  by  Nature 
Basil  argues  in  that  Address  for  the  truth  of  Reve- 
lation, as  satisfying  its  eager  cravings  and  best 
aspirations. 

Let  us  make  an  extract  from  it  as  a  specimen  of 
Basil's  treatment  of  Ancient  Literature.  He  is  refer- 
ring to  the  beautiful  picture  drawn  by  Homer  in  the 
Odyssey,  of  the  daughter  of  Alcinous,  King  of  the 
Phaeacians,  Nausicaa,  when  she  first  saw  Ulysses, 
who  had  been  shipwrecked  and  cast  by  the  waves 
on  the  shore.  "  In  nothing  ^  has  Homer  more  clearly 
shown  his  virtuous  design  (says  Basil)  than  in  his  repre- 
sentation of  Ulysses  when  saved  from  shipwreck.  He 
has  described  the  Princess  Nausicaa  as  inspired  with 
reverence  for  Ulysses  at  his  first  approach  ;  and  far 
from  being  ashamed  at  seeing  him  in  nakedness  and 
alone,  Virtue  had  clothed  him  with  her  own  self  in 
place  of  raiment.^  Afterwards  Ulysses  is  represented 
by  Homer  as  highly  esteemed  by  the  rest  of  the 
Phseacians,  so  that  quitting  their  luxurious  living 
and  self-indulgence  they  turned  their  eyes  to  him  in 
admiration,  and  all  would  have  wished  to  have  been 
like  Ulysses.  Here  then  Homer  seems,  as  it  were, 
to  cry  aloud  and  say,  "  O  men,  love  Virtue,  which 
swims  safe  to  shore  with  him  that  is  shipwrecked ; 
and,  when  he  is  cast  forth  on  the  dry  land,  ennobles 
him  more  than  the  Phseacians." 

2  I  have  here  adopted  the  version  of  the  Rev.  Isaac  Williams  in  his 
interesting  and  instructive  volume,  "The  Christian  Student,"  Oxford, 
1854,  p.  133,  which  is  illustrative  of  Basil's  treatise,  and  might  be  pro- 
fitably studied  by  teachers  and  scholars  in  our  public  schools.  The 
words  which  I  have  quoted  are  accompanied  by  some  charming  verses 
of  the  same  Author. 

3  And  (as  the  same  writer  says  of  Nausicaa)  she  herself  was 

**  Inly  dressed  in  noble  innocence. 
With  goodly  nature  and  sweet  modesty." 


Basil  071  classical  literature.  267 

In  the  same  book  Basil  *  describes  the  study  of  the 
truth  in  Gentile  writers,  as  like  gazing  at  the  sun 
reflected  in  the  water,  that  we  may  be  able  to  look 
up  to  the  true  light ;  and  as  preparing  us  to  under- 
stand the  depths  of  the  Scriptures  by  exercising  the 
eye  of  the  soul  in  looking  at  the  reflection  of  truth  in 
earthly  mirrors  and  shadows  of  it.  At  the  same  time 
Basil  advises  the  application  of  an  eclectic  process 
to  their  writings.  His  young  students  must  test 
them  by  the  touchstone  of  the  Gospel.  In  such 
studies  "  we  are  to  look  at  all  things  as  they  conduce 
to  eternal  good  in  the  future  life.  We  are  to  turn  a 
deaf  ear  to  all  voluptuous  enchantments,  as  Ulysses 
closed  up  with  wax  the  ears  of  his  sailors  against  the 
songs  of  the  Sirens  ;  we  are  to  extract  the  honey 
from  the  flowers  of  heathen  Poetry  and  Philosophy, 
and  are  not  to  be  enchanted  with  their  colour  and 
their  perfume.  We  are  to  consecrate  those  studies  to 
the  glory  of  God,  and  the  good  of  His  Church,  and 
the  salvation  of  souls."  ^ 

He  refers  in  this  book  to  the  noble  lines  of  Hesiod^ 
concerning  the  steep  and  rugged  road  of  Virtue 
leading  upward  to  a  glorious  Eminence,  as  compared 
with  the  smooth  and  easy  path  of  Vice,  sloping 
downward  to  destruction  ;  and  quotes  "^  the  apologue  of 
Prodicus  of  Ceos,  so  beautifully  expanded  by  Socrates 
in  Xenophon's  Memorabilia,^  on  the   choice   of  the 

^  His  friend  Gregory  (de  Vita  sua,  Carm.  xi.  v.  no  sqq.)  states 
another  reason  for  his  own  study  of  Heathen  writers,  viz.  that  he  might 
refute  Heathenism  and  defend  Christianity. 

5  De  Broglie  (L'j£glise,  v.  224—228)  has  some  excellent  remarks  on 
this  treatise  of  Basil. 

6  Opera  et  Dies,  ii.  285 — 290.     Basil,  ii.  p.  176. 
"  Basil,  ii.  p.  177. 

s  Xen.  Mem.  ii.  i.  21. 


268  Basil  on  classical  studies. 

youthful  Hercules  between  the  rival  claims  and 
appeals  of  two  beautiful  women,  Virtue  and  Pleasure ; 
and  he  thence  infers  that  to  the  Heathen  some 
glimpses  were  revealed  of  the  great  moral  truth 
preached  to  the  World  by  Christ  in  His  Divine  words 
concerning  the  broad  and  narrow  Ways  (Matt.  vii.  13, 
14),  the  one  the  path  of  Life,  the  other  leading  to 
destruction.  He  reminds  the  young  men  of  Csesarea 
that  the  great  Athenian  orator  and  statesman, 
Pericles,^  was  an  example  of  patient  forbearance,  and 
was  not  moved  to  passion  by  the  scurrilous  abuse  of 
a  petulant  railer  reviling  him  all  day  long,  but  cour- 
teously lighted  him  home  to  his  house  in  the  even- 
ing ;  and  he  mentions  instances  of  similar  calmness 
and  forgiveness  of  enemies  on  the  part  of  Euclid  of 
Megara  towards  a  man  who  said  that  he  had 
sworn  with  an  oath  that  he  would  kill  him  ;  "  Yes," 
he  replied,  "  and  I  have  also  sworn  with  an  oath  that 
I  will  pacify  you."  And  he  refers  to  the  exemplary 
chastity  and  self-restraint  of  the  youthful  Conqueror 
of  Persia,  Alexander  the  Great,  in  the  presence  of  his 
beautiful  captives,  the  daughters  of  Darius.  And, 
asks  Basil,  "  If  heathens  could  act  thus,  what  is  to  be 
expected  of  you  Christians  ?  " 

He  appeals  to  the  vast  pains  taken  by  the  athletes 
of  heathen  Antiquity,  like  Milo,  to  prepare  themselves 
by  long  training  and  self-denial  for  gymnastic  con- 
tests and  conquests ;  and  to  the  perseverance  of 
Timotheus  in  practising  on  the  lyre,  in  order  that 
he  might  sway  by  its  music  the  passions  of  Alex- 
ander the  Great  at  his  nuptial  feast.^     And  he  adds, 

9  Basil,  ii.  178. 

^  Ibid.  ii.  p.  179.  Compare  Dryden's  Ode  on  S.  Caecilia's  Day— 
"Alexander's  Feast." 


Gregory  Nazianzen  on  Basil.  269 

"  If  these  gentile  artists  made  such  diligent  and  un- 
wearied preparations  and  endeavours  for  the  attain- 
ment of  excellence  in  their  earthly  art,  and  for  the 
fading  garlands  of  ephemeral  victories,  what  ought 
we  not  to  do  for  proficiency  in  the  art  of  arts — holiness 
of  life — and  for  the  beautiful  crown  of  everlasting 
glory?" 

One  of  the  causes  of  the  success  of  Basil^s  teaching 
was,  that  he  knew  how  to  apply  the  arguments  from 
the  best  works  of  ancient  Poetry  and  Philosophy  to 
the  confirmation  and  attestation  of  divine  truth  ;  and 
his  sermons  derived  much  of  their  persuasive  influence 
on  a  Greek  and  Asiatic  audience  from  their  allusions 
to  gentile  Literature  and  Art. 

The  following  words  express  the  feelings  of  his 
friend  Gregory  Nazianzen  on  reading  the  writings  of 
Basil :  ^ — "  When  I  take  into  my  hands  and  read  his 
Hexameron  '^  (his  commentary  on  the  first  Chapter  of 
Genesis),  "  I  am  brought  into  communion  with  the 
Creator,  and  understand  the  words  of  Creation.  When 
I  peruse  the  books  he  has  written  on  the  Holy 
Spirit,  I  find  out  God,  and  I  preach  boldly  the  truth, 
treading  in  the  steps  of  his  theology  and  contem- 
plation. When  I  read  his  other  expositions,  I  do  not 
halt  at  the  mere  outward  letter,  but  I  pierce  down 
deep  into  the  spirit,  and  hear  as  it  were  "  one  deep 
calling  to  another,"  ^  and  I  behold  light  streaming  in 
upon  light,  and  thus  I  grasp  the  sublime  meanings 
of  Holy  Scripture," 


^  Greg.  Naz,  Orat.  xliii.  p.  822.  Gregory  also  eulogizes  Basil's 
learning,  wisdom,  and  eloquence  in  his  autobiographical  Poem,  v.  221, 
p.  687,  and  describes  his  friendship,  cherished  by  himself  at  Athens  and 
afterwards,  as  one  of  the  greatest  blessings  of  his  life. 

2  Ps.  xlii.  9. 


270     Theniistius  on  Toleration — Inroads  of  the  Goths. 

Let  us  now  turn  from  Basil  to  Valens,  and  from 
Caesarea  to  Antioch. 

Themistius,  the  heathen  sophist  and  rhetorician  of 
Antioch,  endeavoured  to  mitigate  the  rage  of  the 
Emperor  against  the  Catholics,  and  pleaded  for 
Toleration  ;  and  it  is  said  that  the  effect  of  the  appeal 
was  that  in  some  cases  death  was  commuted  for 
banishment/ 

But  a  more  powerful  aid  was  now  exerted  in  their 
behalf  The  Goths  were  employed  by  Divine  Provi- 
dence as  an  instrument  for  punishing  the  sins  of  the 
East  and  West.  They  were  now  retreating  from 
before  the  victorious  arms  of  the  Huns,  who  were 
driving  them  from  their  homes  in  Scythia,  and  they 
were  pouring  down  in  vast  nomad  swarms  into  Dacia, 
on  the  north  of  the  Danube.  They  sent  an  embassy 
to  Valens  for  help  against  their  pursuers.  Their 
principal  envoy  was  Ulfilas,^  a  Goth  of  Christian 
ancestry,  who  had  been  consecratedTVlissionary  Bishop, 
and  who  had  made  many  converts  to  the  faith. 
Many  Gothic  Christians  were  persecuted  by  their 
heathen  fellow-countrymen,  and  died  glorious  deaths 
as  Martyrs  for  the  truth.  Ulfilas,  their  Bishop,  is  said 
to  have  introduced  alphabetical  characters  among  the 
Goths  ;  he  translated  a  large  portion  of  the  Scriptures 
into  their  language  ;  his  Version  of  parts  of  the  New 
Testament  is  still  extant^  He  was  at  first,  it  is 
said,  a  Catholic,  and  in  communion  with  Damasus  ; 
and  Basil  spoke  of  that  country  as  holding  the  true 
faith.  But  through  the  sinister  influence  of  Valens, 
who  would  only  listen  to  overtures  of  friendship  on 

•*  Socr.  iv.  32.     Sozom.  vi.  36. 

5  On  Ulfilas,  see  above,  pp.  43,  44. 

6  It  is  printed  in  the  Abbe  Migne's  Patrologia,  torn,  xviii.  p.  498,  ed. 
Paris.  1848. 


Overtures  of  the  Goths  to  Valens—  Their  revolt — Alarm  271 
of  the  E?nperor. 

that  condition,  he  and  his  people  had  been  perverted 

to  Arianism.''' 

Valens  was  gratified  by  the  overtures  of  the  Gothic 
Ambassadors.  If  the  Goths  were  allowed  to  cross  the 
Danube  and  settle  in  Thrace,  they  pledged  themselves 
to  defend  the  Roman  frontier  against  all  barbarian 
irruptions.  They  would  be  like  a  military  Vallum 
against  the  Huns.  The  Emperor  supplied  them  with 
transports,  but  under  the  unwise  condition  that  they 
should  surrender  their  arms. 

This  was  an  ungracious  stipulation,  and  the  nego- 
tiations for  the  Gothic  colonization  of  Thrace  were 
marred  by  so  much  injustice,  cruelty,  avarice,  and 
sensual  licentiousness  on  the  part  of  the  Roman 
officers,  civil  and  military,  who  were  entrusted  with  the 
execution  of  the  imperial  commission,  that  instead  of 
being  defenders  of  the  Roman  territory,  the  Goths 
became  formidable  enemies  and  restless  invaders 
of  the  Roman  dominions. 

At  the  close  of  the  year  377,  Valens  received  at 
Antioch  the  alarming  intelligence  that  the  Gothic 
Colonists,  about  200,000  strong,  were  in  revolt.  He 
left  Antioch  for  Constantinople,  which  he  reached  on 
the  30th  of  May,  A.D.  378.  He  had  despatched  a  mes- 
sage for  help  to  his  nephew  Gratian  in  the  West,  who 
had  returned  in  triumph  from  a  successful  campaign 
in  Germany,  and  who  promised  to  come  to  his  aid. 

In  the  mean  time  the  two  rival  tribes  of  Ostrogoths 
and  Visigoths,  and  even  some  of  their  enemies  the 
Huns,  were  concentrating  a  tremendous  force  against 
the  imperial  power.  The  Emperor  was  publicly 
denounced  at  Constantinople  by  the  populace  as  the 
author  of  the  national  calamity  ;  he  had  invited  the 
barbarians  into  the  Roman  territory,  which  they  were 

7  Sozom.  vi,  37.     Socr.  iv..  33.     Theodoret,  iv.  33. 


272      March  of  Valejis  to  Adrianople — Terrible  defeat. 

now  claiming  as  their  own.  Provoked  by  this  popular 
indignation,  and  beguiled  by  courtly  flatterers,  Valens 
determined  to  lead  his  forces  in  person  against  the 
Goths.  With  this  resolve  he  marched  to  Adrianople, 
and  encamped  there.  His  Lieutenant,  Duke  Sebas- 
tian— who  had  been  the  friend  of  Gregory  of  Cappa- 
docia,  and  the  Persecutor  of  Athanasius  and  of  the 
Catholics  at  Alexandria  in  A.D.  356 — sent  an  ex- 
aggerated report  of  his  own  military  achievements 
against  the  Goths,  which  tempted  Valens  to  jealousy 
and  rashness.  He  was  impatient  to  seize  the  glory 
of  an  anticipated  victory.  He  would  claim  for  him- 
self all  the  success  of  the  conquest,  and  would  not 
wait  for  the  arrival  of  his  nephew  Gratian's  reinforce- 
ments, lest  he  should  be  a  sharer  in  the  triumph.  He 
was  also  deluded  by  a  treacherous  message  received 
from  the  Gothic  chief  Fritigern,  by  means  of  a  Chris- 
tian Priest  of  that  country ;  and  in  a  fit  of  reckless 
infatuation,  as  if  under  the  spell  of  destiny,  Valens 
rushed  to  his  own  destruction,  and  to  that  of  his  army.^ 
The  engagement  took  place  at  about  ten  miles 
north  of  Adrianople,  on  August  9,  A.D.  378.  Some 
time  was  lost  in  parleying.  In  the  mean  while  the 
sun  shone  fiercely.  The  Romans  were  exposed  to  its 
scorching  glare,  and  were  exhausted  with  hunger, 
thirst,  and  fatigue.  The  squadrons  of  the  Goths 
swept  down  with  a  whirlwind's  force  from  the  hills,  to 
join  their  allies  in  the  plain,  and  added  new  terrors  to 
the  charge.     The  Roman  cavalry  ^  was  routed  ;  the 

*  As  stated  by  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  xxxi.  I2  :  "Vicit  funesta 
Principis  destinatio,  et  adulabilis  quorundum  sententia  regiorum,  qui 
ne  psene  jam  partae  victorise,  ut  opinabantur,  censors  fieret  Gratianus, 
properari  cursu  celeri  suadebant." 

^  See  Gibbon's  description,  ch.  xxvi.  p.  409,  from  Marcellinus, 
xxxi.  12,  13. 


Battle  of  Adrianople — death  of  Valens^prophedes.    273 

infantry  cut  to  pieces.  Above  two-thirds  of  the 
Roman  army  was  slain.  Sebastian  and  other  Gene- 
rals among  them  perished.  Adrianople  was  a  second 
Cannae.^ 

The  body-guard  of  the  Emperor  himself  was  closely 
hemmed  in  ;  the  Emperor  was  wounded  by  an  arrow, 
and  at  nightfall  was  carried  from  the  field  to  a  cottage, 
which  was  set  on  fire  by  the  enemy,  and  Valens  was 
burnt  to  death  in  the  flames.  He  died  in  the  fiftieth 
year  of  his  age,  having  reigned  fourteen  years  and 
four  months  and  a  few  days. 

Some  singular  incidents  in  his  death  have  been 
noticed  by  the  historians.  He  perished  by  fire,  the 
element  by  which  he  had  destroyed  others.  Among 
the  Magicians  whom  Valens  had  commanded  to  be 
put  to  death  ^  was  Simonides,  whom  he  ordered  to  be 
burnt  alive.^  They  had  predicted  that  Valens  would 
be  succeeded  by  a  person  ^  whose  name  began  with 
the  lettersTHEOD(a  prophecy  verified  inTheodosius). 
They  also  foretold  in  oracular  verses  '^  that  the  death 
of  Simonides  by  fire  would  be  avenged  by  fire,  and 
that  Valens  would   die   in  a  particular  place  called 


1  Ammian,  Marcellin.  xxxi.  13.  2  See  above,  p.  213. 

^  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxix,  i. 

^  These  three  verses  as  they  stand  in  editions  of  Ammianus  Marcellinus 
(xxix.  I  ;  op.  xxxi.  14)  are  in  a  corrupt  state,  and  need  emendation. 
They  are  printed  incorrectly  thus  : — 

Oh  ixoLV  vt]Troivi  76  crbv  eaa-erai  ai/na'  koI  aurols 
Tic-KpSpT]  BapvfjLrjvis  'E*OITA22EI  KUKhu  oItov 
'Ev  Tre  SioifTi  M.ijxavTO'i  AI  A  A  {some  MSS.  read  AIAAAI) 
Kaiofj.4voLS  KAP. 
May  I  be  allowed  to  offer  the  following  conjectures  upon  them  ?     I 
would    propose    to   read    NHnOINEI    for   uniroiui,    and    'E<I>0ITA2EN 
(i.  e.    visited ;    the  prophetic   aorist,    like  Jude    14,   ^A0e    Kyptos)   for 
4(poiTda-(T€i  ;  and  'lAAAEI    (taAAet  i.  e.   sends)  for  al\a,  or  aidWi ;  and 
KHP  (i.  e.  J^ate)  for  Kap  ;  and  I  have  so  translated  the  lines  ;  see  over  leaf. 
VOL.    II.  T 


2  74  Oracular  presages  on  the  death  of  Valens. 

the  plains   of  Mimas}     The  prophetic   verses  were 
these : — 

''  Thy  blood  however  (O  Simonides)  will  not' be  un- 
avenged ;  the  wrathful  Tisiphoue  hath  visited  them 
(i.  e.  thy  murderers).  Fate  sends  an  evil  death  to  them 
burnt  in  the  plains  of  Mimas' 

The  death  of  Valens  by  fire  is  more  remarkable 
when  it  is  remembered  that  eighty  Priests  ^  were  burnt 
in  a  ship  by  his  order  at  Nicomedia. 

Ammianus  Marcellinus  explains  "the  plains  of 
Mimas."  It  was  like  the  oracle  which  predicted 
Julian's  death  in  Phrygia.^  Valens,  having  heard  this 
oracle  (says  that  historian  ^),  "  at  first  despised  it ;  but 
being  panic-struck  with  alarms  by  the  occurrence  of 
terrible  sorrows,  he  avoided  Mount  Mimas  in  Asia, 
and  even  Asia  itself;  but  after  his  death  it  was  dis- 
covered that  at  the  place  where  he  fell  in  battle,  there 
was  a  Tomb,  engraved  with  an  inscription  in  Greek 
letters,  of  an  ancient  hero  MlMAS." 

Such  are  the  comments  of  the  heathen  historian. 
To  the  Christian  reader  other  reflections  will  suggest 
themselves.  One  will  probably  be  that,  in  the  inscru- 
table dispensations  of  Divine  Providence,  Valens,  the 
persecutor  of  the  Catholics  and  the  partisan  of 
Arianism  for  fourteen  years,  perished  by  the  hands  of 
those  whom  he  had  invited  to  defend  him  and  his 
Empire,  and  whom  he  had  perverted  from  Catholicism 
to  Arianism,  as  a  condition  of  his  own  friendship  and 

6  Ammian.  Marcellin.xxix.  i,  who  says  that  they  foretold  that  the 
Furies  breathing  blood  and  fire  waited  for  the  Emperor.  Some 
historians  (Ammian.  Marc.  xxx.  I  ;  Evagr.  i.  20)  report  that  a  huge 
Bath  was  constructed  by  Valens,  which  required  an  immense  quantity 
of  wood  to  heat  it,  and  was  called  the  "  Bath  of  Valens,"  and  gave 
occasion  to  scurrilous  raillery — "  See  how  Valens  burns." 

6  Above,  p.  233.  ?  See  above,  p.  179. 

8  Ammian.  Marcellin.  xxxi.  14. 


Preservation  of  Theodosius — Last  days  of  S.  Basil.   2  75 

alliance  with  them  ;  and  that  by  his  death  he  opened 
the  way  at  Adrianople  for  the  accession  of  Theodosius, 
who  bore  the  fatal  initials  in  his  name,  and  had 
been  preserved  from  the  hands  of  Valens  ;  and  who 
successfully  repelled  the  Goths,  the  conquerors  of 
Valens  and  destroyers  of  his  army ;  and  who  sup- 
pressed Arianism  when  it  seemed  dominant,  and  raised 
up  Catholicism  when  prostrate ;  and  summoned  the 
Council  of  Constantinople,  which  confirmed  the  Creed 
of  Nicaea,  and  added  those  Articles  to  it,  which  S. 
Basil  had  said  were  alone  needed,  by  declaring  the 
consubstantial  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

Let  us  now  pass  from  the  cottage  near  Adrianople, 
where  the  Roman  Emperor  perished  by  fire,  to  another 
death-bed— that  of  S.  Basil  at  Csesarea. 

He  survived  Valens  only  a  few  months,  but  he 
was  spared  long  enough  to  see  the  fruit  of  his  labours 
and  sufferings  for  the  faith.  In  some  of  his  last 
letters^  he  expresses  his  hopes,  and  prays  for  the 
peace  of  the  Church.  He  saw  with  joy  that,  by  the 
Edict  of  Gratian,  who  after  the  death  of  Valens  had 
the  supreme  power,  the  banished  Bishops  were  re- 
stored to  their  sees.^  He  knew  that  Gratian  was 
sound  in  Christian  doctrine,  which  he  had  received 
from  S.  Ambrose,  Bishop  of  Milan,  who  had  just 
composed  for  his  special  use,  when  Gratian  was 
marching  to  the  East  to  assist  his  uncle  Valens,  his 
"  Books  on  Faith,"  ^  in  which  he  exhorts  him  to  hold 
the  true  faith  as  set  forth  in  the  Creed  of  Nicaea,  and 
guards  him  against  Arianism  and  SabeUianism. 

9  To  the  Bishop  of  Edessa,  Barses,  Epist.  267,  and  to  his  friend 
Eusebius  of  Samosata,  Epist.  268.  ^  Theodoret,  v.  2. 

2  S.  Ambrosii  "  De  Fide  ad  Gratianum  Augustum  libri  quinque," 
Opera,  torn.  iii.  pp.  342—443. 

T   2 


276  Death  of  S.  Basil. 

Basil  perhaps  foresaw  the  accession  of  Theodosius, 
who  was  proclaimed  Augustus  in  the  East  on  the 
19th  of  January,  A.D.  379 — about  three  weeks  after 
Basil's  death.  Perhaps  he  exhorted  his  friend  Gre 
gory  Nazianzen  to  go  to  Constantinople,  where,  after 
forty  years  of  conflict,  the  Faith  was  re-established 
by  his  means. 

In  the  short  interval  before  his  death,  Basil's 
strength,  which  had  been  exhausted  by  severe  labours, 
manifold  anxieties,  bodily  infirmities,  and  rigid  aus- 
terity, was  refreshed  for  a  time,  and  he  was  enabled 
(says  his  friend  Gregory,  in  the  oration  which  he 
pronounced  at  Caesarea  on  the  anniversary  of  his 
death,  about  three  years  after  it)  to  strengthen  his 
friends  by  words  of  holiness  and  wisdom ;  and  he 
laid  his  hands  on  some  of  his  most  faithful  scholars 
for  the  service  of  the  sanctuary,  and  then  with  his 
dying  breath  he  joyfully  said,  "  Lord,  into  Thy  hands 
I  commend  my  spirit,"  and  fell  asleep.^  He  died  on 
January  i,  the  Feast  of  the  Circumcision,  A.D.  379, 
probably  in  the  fiftieth  year  of  his  age.* 

The  affectionate  reverence  in  which  he  was  held 
was  shown  by  an  immense  concourse  of  vast  multi- 
tudes, not  only  of  Christians,  but  of  Jews  and 
Heathens,  neighbours  and  strangers,  flocking  to  his 
funeral.  In  the  words  of  Gregory,^  "  His  body  was 
at  last  laid  in  the  sepulchre  of  his  fathers  ;  and  he 
who  had  been  the  chief  of  Bishops,  was  united  to 
other  Bishops  ;  and  that  Voice  of  power  which  still 
rings  in  my  ears  was  joined  to  other  Preachers,  and 
another  Martyr  was  added  to  the  Martyrs  who  had 
gone  before  him  to  glory." 

*  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xliii.  §  79,  §  80.  ^  Maran,  p.  xxxviii. 

5  Orat. xliii.  ibid. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

Divine  Worship  iii  the  Church — Ancient  Liturgies — 
Effects  produced  on  Christian  Life — Marriage  and 
Celibacy — Elevation  of  Womanhood — Its  Influence. 

In  reading  the  history  of  the  Church  in  times  of 
trial  and  trouble,  such  as  those  which  she  endured 
in  the  reigns  of  Constantius,  Julian,  and  Valens,  we 
may  perhaps  need  to  be  reminded  that  the  power  and 
love  of  her  Divine  Lord  was  ever  working  in  quiet 
ways  of  His  own  appointment,  which  never  ceased  to 
quicken,  cherish,  and  sustain  her  inner  life,  and  to 
bring  forth  fruits  of  piety,  holiness,  and  charity  in  her 
faithful  members. 

Among  the  religious  and  moral  instruments 
and  influences  which  sustained,  strengthened,  and 
expanded  the  life  of  the  Christian  Church,  none  were 
more  potent  than  those  which  operated  in  her 
Liturgical  offices,  in  the  largest  sense  of  the  term. 
A  Scriptural  and  Catholic  Liturgy  possesses  a  con- 
servative and  restorative  power ;  it  is  like  a  sacred 
Anchor,  mooring  the  ship  of  the  Church  amid  the 
storms  of  Heresy  and  Schism,  and  enabling  it  after 
the  tempest  to  make  missionary  voyages  for  evange- 
lizing the  world. 

One  of  the  wisest  acts  in  S.  Basils  Episcopate 
at  Caesarea  was,  as  we  have  seen,^  to  revise,  methodize, 

1  Above,  pp.  237,  238. 


278  S.  Basil's  Liturgy — Unwritten  Liturgies. 

enlarge,  and  consolidate  the  Liturgy  of  his  own 
Church,  and  to  reduce  it  to  writing.  The  fruit 
of  his  labours  in  this  respect  was  richly  abundant 
in  the  extension  of  the  use  of  that  Liturgy,  and  in  the 
continuance  of  it  with  some  modifications  and  addi- 
tions in  the  Eastern  Church.  The  Liturgy  of  S.  Basil 
appears  to  have  been,  in  substance,  the  groundwork 
of  the  Constantinopolitan  Liturgy  of  S.  Chrysostom, 
which  is  now  predominant  in  the  East.^ 

But  S.  Basil's  Liturgy,  as  he  himself  intimates, 
owed  its  origin  to  more  ancient  ^  forms.  Those  forms 
were  derived  from  Apostolic  times.  There  is  reason, 
however,  to  think  that  the  primitive  Liturgies  were 
not  committed  to  writing.  This  is  probably  to  be 
ascribed  to  the  profound  reverence  entertained  by 
Christians  for  the  holy  Mysteries  of  their  religion, 
which  they  desired  to  protect  from  desecration.  In 
fact,  though  we  hear  of  sacred  Books  falling  into 
heathen  hands,  and  being  given  up  to  them  by  the 
"  Traditors,"  as  they  were  called,  and  of  their  being 
destroyed  by  the  heathen  in  times  of  persecution,  we 
find  that  these  statements  apply  to  the  Books  of  the 
Old  and  New  Testament,  but  not  to  **  Service  Books" 
or  "  Liturgical  Offices  "  of  the  Church. 

S.  Basil  *  appears  to  intimate  that  even  in  his 
time  the  substance  of  the  Liturgies  was  the  same 
in  all  Churches,  but  were  characterized  respectively 
by  some  circumstantial  varieties  ;  and  even    in   the 

2  Dr.  J.  M.  Neale,  Eastern  Church,  i.  p.  318. 

3  Basil  (in  Epist.  207)  says  that  the  customs  of  psalmody  which  he 
had  appointed  in  his  coenobia  were  "consonant  and  agreeable  to  all  the 
Churches  of  God,"  and  he  proceeded  on  the  same  principles  in  a  matter 
of  greater  importance,  the  Liturgy  of  his  Church.  Cp.  Palmer's  Ori- 
gines  Liturgicse,  i.  67. 

*  See  above,  p.  238,  note. 


History  of  Ancient  Liturgies.  279 

celebration  of  the  Holy  Communion  the  precise  form 
of  words  to  be  used  was  retained  in  the  memory  of 
the  Celebrant,  but  not  consigned  to  books.^ 

The  primitive  form  of  the  Christian  Liturgies  has 
been  already  presented  to  the  reader  in  the  words  of 
S.  Justin  Martyr.^  To  his  description  may  be  added 
the  statements  in  the  "  Apostolic  Constitutions,"  ^ 
which  are  probably  not  later  than  the  third  century.^ 

There  the  Bishop  is  represented  as  seated  in  the 
apse  at  the  East  end  of  the  Church,  with  the  Presby- 
ters on  each  side  of  him.  The  Divine  Service  is 
described  as  beginning  with  the  reading  of  Lessons 
from  the  Old  Testament ;  then  follow  Psalms  ;  then 
Lessons  from  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  the  Epistles 
of  St.  Paul,  the  Four  Gospels ;  then  the  Catechumens 
and  Penitents  withdraw  from  the  Church.  Praises  to 
God  are  sung  (Ps.  Ixviii.  34). 

This  portion  of  the  service  was  called,  in  later 
liturgical  language,  the  "  Missa  catechiimenorum." 
It  was  succeeded  by  what  was  termed  the  "  Missa  fide- 
Hum''  This  commenced,  according  to  the  Apostolic 
Constitutions,  with  the  ''^  osciduin  pads!'  Then  fol- 
lowed  prayers  for  the  whole   Church  ^  and  World,  for 

'  Cp.  Daniel,  Codex  Liturgicus,  torn.  iv.  fasc.  i.  p.  25.  On  the 
history  and  contents  of  the  Ancient  Liturgies,  see  especially  the  learned 
work  of  Mr.  C.  E.  Hammond,  Oxford,  1878. 

6  Above,  vol.  i.  pp.  62—65  ;  and  see  ibid.  p.  60. 

?  Const.  Apost.  ii.  57.  Cp.  Const.  Apost.  viii.  6—14,  which  probably 
belongs  to  the  time  of  S.  Hippolytus,  that  is,  the  earlier  part  of  the 
third  century.    See  above,  vol.  i.  p.  416,  and  my  work  on  S.  Hippolytus, 

143.  235- 

»  Dr.  Neale  (Pref.  to  Clementine  Liturgy)  assigns  the  Liturgy  in 
them  to  an  earlier  date.  Bp.  Beveridge  (Synod.  Appendix  ii.  p.  40) 
attributes  the  Constitutions  to  Clemens  Alexandrinus. 

9  There  is  no  mention  here,  nor  in  the  Eighth  Book  of  the  Apostolic 
Constitutions,  cap.  10,  nor  in  S.Justin  Martyr,  of  "  Prayers  for  the  faith- 
ful departed,"  as  in  other  Liturgies.     In  the  Eighth  Book  of  the  Con- 


2  8o  Order  and  contents  of  Ancient  Liturgies. 

Priests  and  Rulers,  for  the  Bishop  and  Emperor, 
for  the  peace  of  all.^  Then  the  Bishop  gave  a  bless- 
ing to  the  people.  After  it  followed  "the  sacrifice, 
and  the  reception  of  the  Body  of  the  Lord  and 
His  precious  Blood  by  all  present "  in  a  regulated 
order  and  succession. 

This  57th  chapter  of  the  Second  Book  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Constitutions  is  to  be  combined  with  several 
chapters  (chaps.  6  to  15  inclusive)  in  the  Eighth  Book  of 
those  Constitutions,^  which  exhibit  an  amplification  of 
that  57th  chapter  of  the  Second  Book,  and  which 
constitute  what  is  called  the  "  Clementine  Liturgy,"  but 
does  not  seem  to  have  been  used  in  any  Church. 

It  appears  from  these  ancient  testimonies  (to 
which  others  might  be  added)  that  the  Divine  Ser- 
vices of  the  Early  Church  consisted  ^  of — 

1.  The  Reading  of  the  Old  Testament. 

2.  Psalmody"*  and  Hymnody. 

3.  The  Reading  of  the  New  Testament. 

4.  Sermon.^ 

5.  Prayers  for  Catechumens  and  Penitents  (and 
Energumens,  i.  e.  possessed,  Apost.  Const,  viii.  7  ;  and 
for  the  "  Competentes,"  i.  e.  Candidates  for  baptism). 

stitutions  (cap.  12)  the  words  occur,  "  We  offer  to  Thee  for  all  Samts 
■vvho  have  pleased  Thee  from  the  beginning  and  whose  names  Thou 
knowest,  for  Apostles,  Martyrs,  Confessors,"  and  there  is  a  prayer  for 
grace  to  remember  them  in  cap.  13.     Cp.  below,  p.  287. 

*  Dr.  Neale  (Eastern  Church,  i.  509)  gives  an  interesting  summary 
of  the  persons  and  things  (e.  g.  peace,  forgiveness,  fruitful  seasons) 
prayed  for  in  the  ancient  Liturgies  at  the  Holy  Communion.  The 
intercessory  fulness  of  those  Liturgies  is  one  of  their  most  beautiful 
characteristics. 

2  Apost.  Const,  pp.  397 — 411,  ed.  Cotelerii,  Amst.  1724. 

5  Cp.  Daniel,  Codex  Liturgicus,  tom.  iv.  fasc.  i.  p.  18. 

'*  Compare  above,  vol.  i.  122,  the  statement  of  Pliny,  and  Euseb.vii. 
20  and  vii.  30. 

^  Justin  Martyr,  above,  vol.  i.  p.  64. 


Substantial  identity  of  primitive  Litui'gies,  281 

6.  Dismissal  of  Catechumens  and  Penitents. 

7.  Oblation  of  Bread  and  Wine.® 

8.  Silence. 

9.  "  Osculum  Pacis." 

10.  Episcopal  Benediction. 

11.  Thanksgiving.'''     Ter  Sanctus. 

12.  Consecration.**  Words  of  Institution  (Apost. 
Const,  viii.  12^). 

13.  Lord's  Prayer.^ 

14.  Communion.  After  it  the  Psalm,  xxxiv.  8, 
"  Taste  and  see  how  gracious  the  Lord  is." 

15.^  Final  Benediction. 

There  is  no  reason  to  think  that,  even  in  heretical 
communities,  there  were  any  notable  deviations  from 
this  Liturgical  order.^  The  Canon  of  Scripture  was 
the  same.  Indeed  the  Laodicene  Council,  to  which 
we  owe  the  first  Synodical  decree  on  the  Canon  of 
Scripture,  was  probably  under  Arian  influence.*  The 
Psalter  was  the  same  in  all  congregations,  whether 
orthodox  or  heretical ;  there  was  some  diversity  as 
to  Hymns,  which  may  have  induced  that  Council 
to  restrain  their  use.^  The  Lord's  Prayer  was  the 
same  in  all  Churches. 


^  Justin  Martyr,  ibid.  7  Ibid.     Cp.  Iren.  i.  I. 

^  Cp.  Clem.  Alex.  Paed.  ii.  2,  p.  186 ;   Origen  c.  Cels.  viii.  33, 
^  Where  after  Consecration  are  the  words  "we  offer  to  Thee  this 
Bread  and  Cup, "as  in  the  Roman  "  Canon  Missas  post  consecrationem." 
^  Cp.  Daniel,  Cod.  Liturg.  iv.  pp.  22 — 24. 

2  On  later  additions  to  this  order,  and  alterations  in  it,  both  with 
regard  to  what  is  called  the  Prothesis,  and  also  the  Anaphora,  see  Neale, 
Eastern  Church,  i.  361,  464. 

3  '*  Except  in  some  few  marked  phrases,  and  often  not  even  in  these 
(says  Dr.  Neale,  Eastern  Church,  i.  317),  the  Nestorian  or  Jacobite  are 
as  orthodox  as  Catholic  rites." 

^  See  above,  p.  196,  note. 
5  Above,  p.  200. 


282  S  Basil's  Liturgy — 6".  Cyril  of  Jerusalem. 

Thus  the  Christian  Liturgies  supplied  spiritual 
edification  for  all ;  and,  among  the  strifes  of  parties 
there  was  in  them  a  sacred  bond  of  union  to  all.^ 

We  may  now,  by  the  help  of  the  earliest  manu- 
scripts of  S.  Basil's  Liturgy,  form  to  ourselves  a  clear 
view  of  what  it  contained.'^  The  earlier  part  of  it 
comprised  Psalms,  the  reading  of  Scripture,  and  the 
Sermon  ;  and  after  it  intercessory  Prayers  for  Cate- 
chumens and  others,  who  were  successively  dismissed. 
Then  came  the  prayers  of  "  the  faithful,"  that  is,  of 
the  Communicants  ;  and  "  the  kiss  of  peace."  Then 
the  Grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  "  Ter 
Sanctus."  Then  a  Commemoration  of  our  Lord's  acts 
and  words  at  the  Paschal  Supper.  Then  the  obla- 
tion of  God^s  creatures,  the  Bread  and  Wine.^  Next 
the  Invocation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  make  them  to 
become  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ.  Then  inter- 
cessory prayer  for  all  men,  and  for  blessings 
temporal  and  spiritual ;  then  the  Lord's  Prayer ; 
then  the  Benediction,  the  breaking  of  the  bread — 
"  the  holy  things  to  the  holy,"  Communion  of  Clergy 
and  Laity ;  then  the  Thanksgiving  and  final  Bene- 
diction. 

S.  Basil — as  has  been  already  said — proceeded  in 
his  work  of  Liturgical  revision  and  settlement,  on 
ancient  principles,  and  according  to  earlier  models. 
Happily  we  have  also  a  statement  from  a  contemporary 
Bishop — the  Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  "the  Mother  of  all 
Churches,"  S.  Cyril — which  illustrates  and   confirms 

6  On  the  public  worship  of  the  Ancient  Church,  the  reader  may  con- 
sult with  benefit  the  xivth  and  xvth  books  of  Bingham's  Antiquities. 

''  Compare  Palmer,  Origines  Liturgicse,  i.  p.  64,  with  whom  Dr. 
Neale  and  Daniel  substantially  agree. 

8  Compare  above,  vol.  i.  pp.  60,  61. 


Liturgy  of  St.  James  ^  Bishop  of  Jerusalem.         283 

that  opinion.  S.  Cyril,  when  a  presbyter  of  that 
Church,  delivered  ^  a  series  of  eighteen  Catechetical 
Lectures  on  the  Creed  ^  to  adults  who  were  under 
preparation  for  baptism ;  and  we  have  in  those 
Catechetical  Lectures  a  view  of  the  quiet  practical 
work  of  the  Church  in  building  up  her  children  in 
Christian  faith  and  practice. 

Those  eighteen  Catechetical  Lectures  upon  doctrine 
and  duty  were  followed  by  five  others  ^  on  the  Chris- 
tian Sacraments. 

S.  Cyril,  being  a  presbyter  of  Jerusalem,  may  be 
supposed  to  be  expounding  the  Liturgy  as  it  had 
been  handed  down  from  St.  James,  "the  Lord's 
brother,"  the  first  Bishop  of  that  Church ;  and  this 
supposition  is  confirmed  by  the  coincidences  trace- 
able between  Cyril's  description  of  the  Sacramental 
Ritual  and  the  Liturgy  which  now  bears  the  name  of 
St.  James,^  but  which,  however,  has  doubtless  received 

'■^  Probably  in  A.D.  347  or  348.  See  CjTilli  Opera,  ed.  Bened.Venet. 
1763,  p.  xcii.  Cyril  was  bom  probably  in  A.D.  315,  and  died  March  18, 
A.D.  386. 

^  The  baptismal  Creed  which  at  that  time  was  in  use  at  JeiTisalem, 
and  is  expounded  by  Cyril,  is  similar  to  the  Apostles'  Creed  ;  it  may  be 
seen  in  Bingham,  Antiquities,  book  x.  chap,  iv.,  with  other  ancient 
Creeds,  and  in  p.  84  of  the  Benedictine  edition  of  S.  Cyril's  works.  The 
principal  differences  between  it  and  the  Apostles'  Creed  are  that  it  adds 
in  Art.  i.,  "Maker  of  all  things  visible  and  invisible;"  in  Art.  ii., 
*'  born  of  the  Father,  and  Very  God,  by  Whom  all  things  were  made  ;" 
and  Art.  viii.,"the  Holy  Spirit  Who  spake  by  the  prophets." 

The  baptismal  Creed  of  the  Eastern  Church  is  now  the  Nicene  Creed 
(Neale,  p.  96S). 

2  Called  Mystagogic  (i.  e.  introductory  to  the  Christian  Mysteries)  ; 
contained  in  S.  Cyril's  works,  pp.  306 — 332  in  the  Benedictine  edition. 

2  See  the  Benedictine  Editor's  remarks,  p.  323,  who  connects 
S.  Cyril's  description  with  the  Liturgy  of  St.  James,  and  Palmer  (Ori- 
gines  Liturgicae,  i.  35),  who  says,  "In  his  fifth  mystical  Catechesis 
Cyril  describes  the  solemn  liturgy  with  a  minuteness  which  is  most 
satisfactory,  and  which  establishes  in  a  remarkable  manner  the  anti- 


284  S.  Cyrirs  Sacrametital  Lectures— Ritual  of  Baptism. 

many  additions  since  the  Apostolic  age.  And  it  has 
been  reasonably  supposed  that  S.  Basil  paid  a  careful 
regard  to  that  Liturgy  in  the  arrangement  of  his 
own;  and  that  the  "Liturgy  of  St.  James"  had  a 
parental  relation  to  that  of  S.  Basil.^ 

In  the  first  of  those  Sacramental  Lectures,  Cyril 
explains  to  his  catechumens  who  had  been  baptized, 
the  meaning  of  the  ceremonies  used  in  the  baptism  of 
adults  :  ^  "  You,"  he  says,  "  first  turned  your  faces  to 
the  West^ — the  region  of  darkness — and  you  said,  *  I 
renounce  thee,  O  Satan^  and  all  thy  works,  and  all 
thy  pomp,  and  service.'  Then  you  turned  to  the 
East — the  origin  of  light — and  said,  *  I  believe  in  the 
Father,  and  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  in  One 
Baptism  of  repentance.'  " 

He  comments  fully  on  the  moral  and  spiritual 
significance  of  those  acts ;  and  he  tells  them  that 
"  in  the  sacred  font  of  regeneration  God  '  wipes 
away  all  tears  from  all  faces/  ^ 

"  You  then  laid  aside  your  tunic,  in  token  of  having 
put  off  the  old  man,  and  you  were  anointed  with  the 
holy  oil,  and  were  conducted  to  the  font,  and  then 
each  of  you  was  asked  ^  the  question,  '  Dost  thou  be- 

quity  of  St.  James's  Liturgy."  But  he  doubts  (p.  43)  whether,  in  title 
or  in  fact,  that  liturgy  can  be  assigned  to  the  Apostle.  There  is  a  refer- 
ence to  the  Liturgy  of  St.  James  (and  of  S.  Basil)  in  Concil.  Trullan. 
can.  32,  on  the  mixed  chalice  (a.d,  692). 

^  The  Liturgy  of  St.  James,  as  to  its  main  fabric,  is  of  earlier  date  than 
A.D.  200;  the  Clementine  office  (i.e.  in  the  Apostolic  Constitutions)  is 
at  least  not  later  than  a.d.  260;  the  Liturgy  of  St.  Mark  (the  Alexan- 
drine) is  nearly  coeval  with  that  of  St.  James  ;  while  those  of  S.  Basil 
and  S.  Chrysostom  are  to  be  referred  respectively  to  the  Saints  by  whom 
they  purport  to  be  composed.  In  all  these  cases,  several  manifest  in- 
sertions and  additions  do  not  alter  the  truth  of  the  general  statement. 
Such  is  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Neale,  Eastern  Church,  i.  319. 

*  Cyril,  Cateches.  p   307.  ^  P.  310. 

7  These  Lectures  being  addressed  to  adults,  who  received  unction  from 


Ritual  of  Holy  Communion.  285 

lieve  in  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  ? ' 
and  having  made  a  good  confession,  you  were  im- 
mersed three  times,  in  memory  of  Christ's  three  days' 
burial.  Afterwards,  *  being  baptized  into  Christ,  and 
having  put  on  Christ,'  you  received  the  holy  unction  of 
the  Spirit."  ^ 

He  then  proceeds  to  speak  ^  of  the  administration 
of  the  Holy  Eucharist.  He  declares  the  real  Pre- 
sence of  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ.  "  Wherefore," 
he  says,  "  let  us  partake  of  Christ  with  full  assurance 
of  faith  ;  for  under  the  figure  of  Bread  is  given  to  you 
His  Body,  and  under  the  figure  of  Wine  is  given  to 
you  His  Blood ;  ^  so  that  by  partaking  of  His  Body 
and  Blood  you  may  be  united  in  body  and  blood  to 
Him,  and  be  *  partakers  of  the  divine  nature'  "  (i  Pet. 

1.4). 

He  then  describes  the  Ritual  observed  ^  at  Jerusalem 
in  the  administration  of  the  Holy  Eucharist. 

"  Ye  have  seen  the  Deacon  presenting  water  to  the 
celebrant  and  Priests  ^  surrounding  the  altar,  for  the 
washing  of  their  hands.  This  has  a  spiritual  mean- 
ing (Ps.  xxvi.  6).  The  Deacon  then  says,  '  Receive 
one  another,  salute  one  another  ;'  this  is  a  token  of 
mutual  forgiveness  and  love,  as  the  Scripture  teaches 

a  Priest,  and  not  to  persons  baptized  in  infancy,  or  to  others  who  were 
confirmed  by  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  Bishop,  do  not  throw 
light  on  Confirmation,  concerning  which  the  testimonies  of  Tertullian, 
Cyprian,  and  S.  Jerome  may  be  seen  in  Bingham's  Antiquities,  book 
xii.  chaps,  i,  2,  and  3  ;  see  also  book  ix.  6.  And  may  I  refer  to  my 
notes  on  Acts  viii.  15—18,  xix.  6,  Heb.  vi.  i,  on  the  Apostolic  rite 
of  Confirmation  ?  8  Cp.  I  Pet.  iii.  21. 

y  In  a  Catechetical  lecture  on  the  Thursday  before  Easter,  p.  319. 

1  P.  320,  and  p.  321. 

2  It  has  been  supposed  (by  the  Benedictine  Editor,  p.  325)  that  sundry 
particulars  in  the  Eucharistic  ritual  are  not  specified  by  him  here. 

3  T^  tepei  KoX  TOts  irpecrfivrdpois. 


286  Ritual  of  the  Holy  Communiofi. 

(Matt.  V.  23.  I  Cor.  x.  20).  Then  the  celebrant* 
says,  '  Lift  up  your  hearts ;'  and  you  answer, 
*  We  lift  them  up  unto  the  Lord.'  The  Priest  says, 
'  Let  us  give  thanks  unto  the  Lord  ;'  then  you 
answer,  *  It  is  meet  and  right  so  to  do.' 

"  We  then  make  a  commemorative  mention  ^  of  the 
heaven,  and  earth,  and  sea,  and  sun  and  stars,  and  all 
the  creation,  rational  and  irrational,  visible  and  invisible, 
Angels,  Archangels,  Principalities,  powers,  dominions, 
thrones — of  Cherubim  and  Seraphim  (Isa.  vi.  2),  who 
cry,  '  Holy,  Holy,  Holy,  Lord  of  hosts.' 

**  We  then  pray  the  all-merciful  God  to  send  ^  the 
Holy  Spirit  upon  the  elements  which  are  lying  be- 
fore Him,  that  He  may  make  the  Bread  to  be  the  Body 
of  Christ,  and  the  Wine  to  be  the  Blood  of  Christ. 

"  When  the  spiritual  sacrifice  ^  and  unbloody  wor- 
ship have  been  completed,  we  offer  prayers  to  God, 
upon  that  sacrifice  of  propitiation,  for  the  peace  of  the 
Churches,  and  for  the  stability  of  the  World  ;  for 
kings,  for  soldiers  and  allies ;  for  those  in  infirmity 
and  affliction,  and  for  all  who  are  in  need  of  help  — 
for  these  we  all  pray  and  offer  this  sacrifice. 

"Afterwards  we  make  commemorative  mention 
of  those  who  have  fallen  asleep,  firstly  Patriarchs, 
Prophets,  Apostles,  and  Martyrs,  in  order  that  God 
by  their  prayers  ^  and  embassies  may  receive  our 
supplication  ;  and  for  the  holy  Fathers  and  Bishops, 

*  b  lepevs — 6.uot  ras  Kapdlas — exofi^y  irphs  rhv  Kvpiov, 

•'^   fXPTjimoifivofiev. 

^  Compare  the  Invocation  in  the  Liturgy  of  St.  James,  p.  63,  ed. 
Neale,  1858.  In  that  Liturgy  the  words  of  "  Institution "{"  Take, 
eat,  this  is  My  Body  ")  are  inserted,  and  precede  the  Invocation. 

'  As  to  the  sense  in  which  the  Fathers  use  the  word  Sacrifice,  may  I 
refer  to  the  ancient  authorities  quoted  in  my  note  on  Malachi  i.  ii. 

"  See  on  the  Revelation  of  St.  John  vi.  9. 


Prayers  for  the  faithful  and  holy  dcpai'ted.  287 

and  for  all  those  ^  who  have  fallen  asleep  among  us  ; 
believing,  as  we  do,  that  there  will  be  the  greatest 
benefit  to  the  souls  for  whom  the  prayer  is  offered  in 
the  presence  of  this  holy  and  most  awful  sacrifice. 
Then  we  recite  the  Lord's  Prayer.^  Then  the  Priest 
says,  '  The  Holy  things  to  the  Holy.'  ^  Then  you 
answer,  'There  is  one  Holy,  One  Lord,  Jesus  Christ* 
Then  the  Psalm  is  sung,  '  Taste  and  see  how  gracious 
the  Lord  is'  (Ps.  xxxiv.  8). 

"  Then  draw  near,  not  with  the  wrists  stretched  out, 
nor  with  the  fingers  parted,  but  with  the  left  hand 
made  as  a  throne^  for  the  right,  in  order  as  it  were  to 
receive  a  King,  and  receive  in  the  hollow  of  the  palm 
the  Body  of  Christ,  and  say.  Amen. 

"After  communicating  in  the  Body  of  Christ,  next 
approach  to  receive  the  Cup^  of  His  Blood,  and  say 
with  reverence,  Amen, 


'  Some  authorities  read  here  "those  holy  persons,"  &c.,  on  which  the 
Benedictine  Editor  remarks  that  this  is  implied  in  the  words  a7nong  us ; 
and  he  adds  that  "  the  Church  does  not  pray  for  any  but  those  who 
die  in  her  communion,  and  whom  she  supposes  to  have  fallen  asleep  in 
grace  and  holiness." 

On  the  reasons  for  which  the  Church  prayed  for  the  holy  dead, 
and  on  the  form  and  language  of  those  prayers,  and  on  the  persons  for 
whom  she  prayed,  see  the  excellent  remarks  of  Bingham,  Antiquities, 
book  XV.  chapter  iii.  sections  15  and  16.  The  ancient  prayers  for  the 
faithful  dead  afford  a  strong  argument  against  the  dogma  of  Purgatory. 
They  also  supply  proofs  of  belief  in  the  soul's  immortality,  and  in  the 
repose  of  Paradise,  and  in  future  Resurrection,  Judgment,  and  Life 
Everlasting.  Cp.  Neale,  Eastern  Church,  i.  p.  509  ;  Neander,  iii.  446  ; 
Canon  Luckock, "  After  death,"  p.  103. 

1  In  his  exposition  of  the  Lord's  Prayer  here,  S.  Cyril  interprets 
pvaai  Tjfxas  airh  tov  irovi^pov  by  "deliver  us  from  the  Evil  One." 

2  TO  ayia  toIs  ayiois,  p,  332. 

3  Concil.  Trullan.  can.  loi,  says  "in  the  form  of  a  cross." 

4  In  every  ancient  Liturgy  all  the  comnmnicants  are  supposed  to 
partake  of  the  Cup  as  well  as  of  the  Bread. 

The  student  of  the  Ancient  Liturgies  will  find  the  requisite  materials 


288  Moral  and  social  effects  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation. 

"  Wait  then  for  the  prayers  ;  and  thank  God  for 
having  vouchsafed  to  admit  you  to  such  holy  mys- 
teries as  these.  Never  cut  yourselves  off  from  com- 
munion ;  never  deprive  yourselves  of  these  holy  and 
spiritual  mysteries  by  impurity  of  life.  And  may  the 
God  of  peace  sanctify  you  wholly,  and  may  your 
body,  soul,  and  spirit  be  preserved  whole  in  the 
Coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,^  to  Whom  with  the 
Father  and  the  Holy  Ghost  be  glory,  honour,  and 
power,  now  and  for  evermore.    Amen!* 


Even  in  the  worst  times  of  the  Church,  such  as 
those  of  Constantius,  Julian,  and  Valens,  the  power 
and  love  of  God — which  worked  by  the  Incarnation 
of  His  Co-eternal  and  Consubstantial  Son,  assuming 
the  Nature  of  Man,  and  making  that  Nature  to  be  a 
partaker  of  the  Divine  Nature  ^  by  uniting  it  to 
God  in  His  own  Person  ;  and  which  operated  by  the 
virtue  of  God  the  Holy  Ghost,  applying  to  each 
individual  member  of  Christ's  mystical  Body  the 
Church,  the  blessings  flowing  from  the  Love  of  the 
Father  through  the  Incarnation  of  God  the  Son,  in 
the  Holy  Sacrament  of  Baptism,  and  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures  read  in  the  Church,  and  in  the  public 
prayers  of  her  Liturgy,  and  especially  in  the  Com- 
munion of  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ — were 
gradually  and  quietly  leavening  human  Society,  and 


in  a  compendious  form  in  Daniel's  Codex  Liturgicus,  Lips.  1853.  The 
ancient  Eastern  Liturgies  may  be  seen  in  Dr.  Neale's  learned  work  on 
the  Eastern  Church,  2  vols.  1850,  and  they  were  printed  by  him  in  a 
small  volume,  Lond.  1859. 

^  I  Thess.  V.  23. 

«  2  Pet.  i.  4. 


Christian  Life — Consecration  of  Womanhood —      289 
Marriage  and  Celibacy. 
were  promoting  its    moral    and    spiritual    regenera- 
tion. 

We  do  not  possess  any  circumstantial  representa- 
tions of  daily  Christian  life  in  the  fourth  century  ; 
but  we  may  believe  that  such  doctrine  as  that  which 
is  set  forth  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  third  century  in 
the  works  of  the  great  Alexandrine  Teacher,  Clement,' 
applying  the  verities  of  Christianity  as  taught  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures  and  Sacraments  to  inculcate  the 
duties  of  daily  life,  cannot  have  failed  of  being  fruit- 
ful, by  divine  grace,  in  producing  a  beneficent  change 
in  human  Society. 

In  nothing  were  the  blessings  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Incarnation,  as  exhibited  in  the  ministration  of  the 
Church,  more  visible  in  social  respects,  than  in  the 
elevation  of  Womanhood,  dignified  and  consecrated 
by  the  Birth  of  the  Son  of  God  from  the  Blessed 
Virgin  Mary,  by  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
The  virtues  and  graces  of  Christian  Womanhood 
shone  to  the  eye  of  God  and  His  holy  Angels  in 
quietness,  gentleness,  and  peace^  and  were  not  subjects 
for  this  world's  history. 

In  the  fourth  century  Celibacy  was  held  in  honour, 
especially  among  the  Clergy.  It  was  true  that  Hebrew 
Prophets  and  Priests  were  married  ;  and  that  St.  Paul  ^ 
had  said  "  Marriage  is  honourable  In  all ;"  and  he,  who 
praised  single  life  (i  Cor.  vil.),  had  condemned  those 
who  "  forbade  to  marry,"  ^  and  speaks  of  the  quali- 
fications of  Priests  and  Deacons  as  husbands  and 
parents,  and  masters  of  families  (i  Tim.  iii.  2,  4,  12. 
Titus  i.  6).    And  it  was  a  primitive  tradition  derived 

"  See  above,  vol.  i.  pp.  254,  266,  268. 

8  Heb.  xiii.  4,  with  Chrysostom's  note.  ^  i  Tim.  iv.  3. 

VOL.    IT.  U 


290         On  the  Mai'riage  and  Celibacy  of  the  Clergy. 

from   St.  Paul's  words  ^  that  not  only  St  Peter  2  but 
other  Apostles  were  married.^ 

In  the  5th  of  the  Apostolic  Canons*  it  was  decreed 
that  "  no  Bishop,  Priest,  or  Deacon  should  put  away 
his  wife  on  the  pretence  of  religion  ;  and  if  he  did  so, 
he  was  to  be  deposed." 

The  opinion  of  the  Egyptian  Bishop  and  Confessor 
Paphnutius  on  this  subject  at  the  Council  of  Nicaea 
— and  the  judgment  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Council 
itself  upon  it — have  been  already  recorded.^  They 
saw  that  there  was  a  tendency  in  some  quarters  to 
impose  celibacy  as  a  rule  on  Bishops  and  Clergy — a 
tendency  which  had  strongly  developed  itself  not  only 
among  various  schools  of  Gnosticism,  but  among 
the  Montanists  and  Novatians.  But  the  Church  up 
to  that  time  had  resisted  it.  The  same  struggle 
manifested  itself  at  Gangra,  as  we  have  seen,®  where 
the  Council  was  animated  with  the  same  spirit  as 
that  which  had  prevailed  at  Nicaea. 

Gregory  Nazianzen  eulogizes  the  piety  and  holi- 
ness of  his  mother  Nonna,  in  the  funeral  oration  on 


^  I  Cor.  ix.  5. 

"  Cp.  Mark  i.  30  ;  Luke  iv.  38.  St.  Peter's  wife  -was  cheered  by  him 
in  her  way  to  martyrdom.  Clemens  ap.  Euseb.  iii.  30,  where  it  is  said 
that  Peter  had  children  by  her. 

3  Cp.  Basil  in  Ascet.  Serm.  de  abdicatione  rerum  ;  Origen  in  Rom. 
xii. ;  Chrysostom  de  Compunctione,  lib.  i.  c.  8  ;  Pseud-Ignai.  in  Philad. 
c.  4,  with  the  note  of  Cotelerius ;  and  Beveridge,  Synod.  Annotat.  ii. 
p.  18. 

4  P.  442,  ed.  Coteler.  Amst.  1724,  and  Beveridge,  Synod,  i.  p.  3, 
where  Balsamon,  the  Canonist  of  Constantinople  and  Patriarch  of 
Antioch  in  the  12th  century,  says  that  "before  the  Sixth  Synod  in 
Trullo  (a.D.  692)  it  was  lawful  for  Bishops  to  have  wives  even  after  their 
elevation  to  the  Episcopal  dignity,  as  Priests  and  Deacons  who  are 
ordained  after  marriage." 

^  Above,  vol.  i.  p.  457.  ^  Above,  p.  244. 


Relations  of  Women  to  the  Church.  291 

his  father/  and  represents  her  as  a  pattern  of  Chris- 
tian womanhood,  and  chooses  for  special  commenda- 
tion the  virtues  which  she  displayed  as  the  wife  «  of 
the  Bishop  of  Nazianzus,  his  father,  whom  she 
survived.* 

For  "  the  present  distress  "  ^  Celibacy  had  special 
recommendations  for  Bishops  and  Clergy  in  the  first 
four  centuries;  and  it  is  not  surprising  that  the 
Fathers  of  that  time  should  for  that  reason,  as  well  as 
for  others,  have  been  enthusiastic  in  its  praise. 

But  they  were  no  less  eloquent  in  their  panegyrics 
of  Christian  Marnage,^  and  of  Christian  Womanhood 
They  loved  to  dwell  on  the  dignity  which  Woman 
had  acquired  by  the  Incarnation,  and  on  the  benefits 
rendered  by  Women  to  the  Church,  which  took  care  to 
enlist  their  services  in  her  works  of  piety  and  charity 
-especially   in    her   organized  societies    of  Virgins 
Deaconesses,  and  Widows.     In  the  Christian  Church' 
and    in    its    Ministry,  no   less   than  among  the    Pa- 
triarchs and  Prophets,  "neither  is  the  man  without 
the  woman,  nor  the  woman  without  the  man,  in  the 
Lord  ;'-  and  the  history  of  the  early  Church  shows 
how   intimately    the  condition  of  that  Ministry  has 
been  connected  with  Womanhood,  and  how  much  it 
has  been  influenced  by  sound  teaching  with  respect 
to  it. 

7  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xviii. 
cl^^'%  '■/''.?o^^^',  ^""^   I^^nry  ^Vharton  on  the  Celibacy  of  the 

'  O '  ^."t        ''  '"'  ^''  J-  ^-  ^°"  S^^"^^^'  Coelibatszwang,  1876. 
^^^On  the  Marriage  of  the  Clergy,  see  Bingham,  Antiquities!  i v.    5. 

^   I  Cor.  vii.  26. 

J  One  of  the  sternest  of  the  Fathers,  Tertullian,  is  the  most  eloquent 
on  Marriage.     See  above,  vol.  i.  331.  ^ 

^  \  Cor.  xi.   II. 

U    2 


2  92       Influence  of  Arianism  on  Womanhood — and  of 
Catholic  doctrtJie — Female  syt?ipathy. 
With  reference  to  the  work  of  Christ  and  of  the 
Church  in  the  relations  of  social   life,  the  records   of 
the  fourth   and  fifth  centuries  suggest  two  remarks 
relevant  to  the  subject  before  us  : 

First,  wherever  the  blessings  of  the  Incarnation 
were  not  realized  in  its  relation  to  Womanhood  — 
as  was  unhappily  the  case  with  Arianism — there  we 
see  Women  in  high  place  taking  the  lead  in  patroniz- 
ing error,  and  in  persecuting  the  truth.  It  may  suf- 
fice, in  evidence  of  this,  to  mention  Constantia,  the 
sister  of  Constantine,  and  friend  of  Arius  ;  Aurelia 
Eusebia,  the  second  wife  of  Constantius;  Albia 
Dominica,  the  wife  of  Valens  ;  Justina,  the  second 
wife  of  Valentinian — all  these  were  partisans  of  Arian- 
ism, and  enemies  of  the  Church. 

But,  secondly,  there  is  a  brighter  side  of  the  pic- 
ture, on   which  the  eye  loves  to   dwell.     There  was 
scarcely  any  great  Saint  and  Teacher  of  the  Church 
in   the  fourth   and  fifth  centuries,    especially  among 
those  who  contended    valiantly  for  the  mystery  of 
God  Incarnate,  in  good  report  and  in  evil  report,  and 
against  the  heresy  of  Arianism  in  its  various  phases 
of  error,  who  was  not  cheered  and   strengthened  by 
the  love  of  Christian  Womanhood.     I  omit  Athana- 
sius,  unless  credit  be  given   to  the  story  related  by 
some    concerning   him    in    his   exile  in    the   desert* 
Like  the   prophet  Jeremiah — but  unlike  the  prophets 
Isaiah  and  Ezekiel,  who  were  married— he  seems  to 
have   been    independent   of  female   sympathy.     His 
fellow-champion  S.  Hilary  appears  to  have  been  mar- 
ried,^ and   to  have  had   a   beloved   daughter,   Abra. 

<  Sozom.  V.  6.     Palladius,  Hist.  Lausiaca,  c.  135,  on  the  asylum  said 
to  have  been  given  to  Athanasius  for  six  years  by  a  Christian  Virgin. 
5  Tillemont,  vii.  435,  448. 


The  greatest  Catholic  Teachers — their  relation  to  293 
Womanhood. 
The  virtues  and  acts  of  S.  Basil  of  Caesarea  were  due 
in  no  small  degree,  under  God,  to  the  influence  of 
his  mother,  grandmother,  and  sister.^  His  brother, 
Gregory  of  Nyssa,  was  supported  by  the  tender  affec- 
tion of  TheosebiaJ  Their  friend  Gregory  Nazianzen 
has  immortalized  with  affectionate  enthusiasm  and 
glowing  eloquence  the  piety  and  virtues  of  his  own 
mother  Nonna,^and  sister  Gorgonia.^  We  should  have 
known  little  of  the  Episcopate  of  the  great  Bishop  of 
Milan,  S.  Ambrose,  if  he  had  not  revealed  the  secrets 
of  his  heart,  and  communicated  the  motives  and 
results  of  his  public  acts,  in  familiar  letters  to  his 
sister  Marcellina  at  Rome.  The  lonely  labours  of  S. 
Jerome,  translating  the  Holy  Scriptures,  commenting 
on  the  sacred  Oracles,  and  defending  the  Christian  faith 
in  his  cloister  at  Bethlehem,  were  refreshed  by  the 
companionship  of  Paula  and  Eustochium.  His  adver- 
sary Rufinus  found  consolation  in  the  society  of 
Melania.  S.  Augustine  became  what  he  was,  by 
the  prayers  of  his  mother  Monica.  The  greatest 
preacher  of  the  Eastern  Church,  S.  John  Chrysostom, 
owed  much  of  his  power,  under  God,  as  a  Christian 

8  Above,  pp.  233,  234. 

7  Some  suppose  that  Theosebia  was  the  wife  of  Gregory  Nyssen. 
This  is  the  opinion  of  Cardinal  Baronius,  Annal,  ad  ann.  369,  and  of 
Tillemont,  torn.  ix.  p.  733.  Nicephorus  also  (ix.  19)  says  that  he  was 
married.  She  is  called  his  av^vyos  by  Gregory  Nazianzen  in  his  con- 
solatory Epistle  to  Gregory  Nyssen  on  her  death  (Epist.  197,  p.  162), 
and  in  his  funeral  inscription  upon  her,  Carm.  123,  p.  1159.  The 
Benedictine  Editors  of  Gregory  Nazianzen's  works,  vol.  i.  Praef.  p.  xxvi, 
and  vol.  ii.  p.  1159,  are  of  opinion  that  she  was  unmarried,  and  that  she 
is  called  his  av^vyos,  ox  yoke-fellow,  because  she  was  either  a  sister  by 
blood,  or  spiritually  as  a  deaconess  of  the  Church,  of  Gregory  Nyssen  ; 
but  the  word  crv^vyos  applied  to  a  woman  seems  rather  to  point  to  a  wife. 

8  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xviii.     See  below,  chap.  ix. 

'  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  viii.  Cp.  Neander,  Church  Hist.  vol.  iii. 
sect.  3,  p.  304,  Engl.  Transl. 


294  •5'-  Ckrysostom  and  Olympias. 

orator,  to  the  early  training  in  Holy  Scripture  which 
he  received  from  his  widowed  mother  Anchusa.  And 
when  he  was  banished  by  the  princes  of  this  world, 
and  was  forsaken  and  condemned  by  some  of  his 
brethren  in  the  Church,  in  times  of  sorrow  and  sick- 
ness, in  the  land  of  his  dreary  exile  where  Jie  died, 
he  found  comfort  in  the  interchange  of  letters  with 
his  dear  daughter  in  Christ,  the  devout,  noble,  and 
loving  Olympias.^ 

^  Sozom.  viii,  9  and  24.  Pallad.  Vit.  Clirys.  c.  15.  There  are 
seventeen  letters  extant,  written  by  Chrysostom  to  Olympias  in  the  time 
of  his  banishment. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

From  the  Accession  of  Theodosius  the  Great,  Jan.  19, 
A.D.  379,  as  Emperor  of  the  East,  to  the  Council  of 
Constantinople,  May  to  July  9,  A.D.  381. 

Like  the  six  preceding  Emperors,^  with  the  ex- 
ception of  Jovian  and  Valentinian,  Valens  died 
childless.  Gratian,  the  elder  of  the  two  sons  of 
Valentinian,  had,  at  his  father's  death,  associated  with 
himself  his  half-brother,  Valentinian  junior,  in  375, 
aged  only  four  years,  in  the  Empire  of  the  West. 

At  the  death  of  Valens  the  northern  frontier  of  the 
East  was  menaced  by  the  Goths,  elated  by  their 
recent  victory  at  Adrianople ;  and  Gratian,  who  was 
not  twenty  years  of  age,  and  was  fully  occupied  with 
the  cares  of  his  own  Western  dominions,  was  conscious 
of  his  inability  to  encounter  the  difficulties  which 
awaited  a  successor  of  Valens  in  the  East,  and  to 
restore  the  shaken  confidence  of  the  people,  and  to 
revive  their  spirit,  broken  by  their  recent  disorder  and 
defeat. 

When  therefore  he  was  at  Sirmium,  on  January  19, 
379,  he  associated  with  himself  Theodosius,  a 
Christian  soldier  of  Spanish  extraction,  a  descendant 
of  the  Emperor  Trajan,  and  resembling  him  in  fea- 
tures. Theodosius  was  then  in  his  thirty-third  year, 
living  a  quiet  life  in  Spain,   in    the    enjoyment   of 

^   Constantine  junior,  Constans,  Constantius,  Julian. 


g6  TJicodosius  Emperor  of  the  East — Religious  distress 
of  Consta?itinople — Macedonians. 
domestic  happiness  with  his  wife  Flaccilla  and  their 
young  children.  He  had  been  already  distinguished 
by  military  skill,  and  by  success  in  his  conflicts  with 
the  barbarians  ^  in  Moesia  ;  and  Gratian  owed  him  a 
debt  of  reparation  for  the  wrong  done  in  the  murder 
of  his  father  Theodoslus,  one  of  the  most  loyal  sub- 
jects and  valiant  captains  of  the  Empire^  who  had 
been  put  to  death  on  a  false  accusation  at  Carthage  in 
A.D.  376.^  Gratian  assigned  to  Theodosius  as  Em- 
peror the  whole  of  the  East,  with  Thrace  and  Eastern 
Illyria,  and  Greece,  of  which  Thessalonica  was  the 
capital. 

At  Constantinople,  Arianism  had  been  dominant 
for  forty  years.  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  had  been 
followed  by  Macedonius,  Macedonius  by  Eudoxius, 
and  Eudoxius  by  Demophilus,  formerly  Bishop  of 
Beroea  in  Thrace,  who  had  tempted  Liberius  to  his 
fall,  and  who  had  held  the  See  of  Constantinople  for 
ten  years,  having  succeeded  Eudoxius  in  A.D.  369. 

Albla  Dominica,  the  widow  of  Valens,  was  a  zealous 
partisan  of  Arians,  Novatians,  and  of  Macedonians, 
who  accepted  the  doctrine  of  the  Son's  divinity,  and 
ranged  themselves  with  the  Semi-Arians,  but  who 
denied  the  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  They  de- 
rived their  name  from  the  former  Bishop  of  Con- 
stantinople, Macedonius  ;  and  they  were  allowed  to 
have  their  own  places  of  religious  assembly,  but  at  the 
accession  of  Theodosius  there  was  no  organized  con- 

2  Theodoret,  v.  5.  Ammianus  Marcellinus  says  (xxix.  ad  fin.), 
"  Dux  Moesiae  Theodosius  prima  lanugine  juvenis,  princeps  postea 
perspectissimus,  fortissime  turbas  confluentes  oppressit." 

^  Socrates  (iv.  9)  says,  by  order  of  Valens,  when  he  put  to  death 
those  whose  names  began  with  THEOD.  See  above,  pp.  213,  273. 
Others  impute  his  murder  to  Gratian  himself.  See  the  authorities  in 
Gibbon,  chap.  xxvi.  vol.  iv.  pp.  421,  422. 


No  congrcgatio7i  of  Catholics  at  Coiistantinople —      297 
Gregory  Naziauzen. 
gregation  of  Catholics   in  the  Christian  city  founded 
by  the  first  Christian  Emperor,  Constantine,  and  the 
Capital  of  the  Eastern  Empire. 

The  question  then  arose,  Who  would  be  able  to 
gather  these  scattered  sheep  into  a  spiritual  fold  ?  He 
ought  to  be  one  who  was  already  a  Bishop,  for 
no  one  now  at  Constantinople  could  restore  the 
Episcopate  there.  He  ought  to  be  well  reported  of 
for  sanctity  of  life,  soundness  of  doctrine,  vigour  of 
intellect ;  mighty  in  the  Scriptures,  gifted  with 
eloquence,  able  to  refute  with  boldness  and  power 
the  Arian  adversaries^  and  to  raise  up  the  prostrate 
Church  of  Constantinople  to  the  position  it  had  for- 
merly occupied  under  the  Episcopal  care  of  the 
noble-hearted  Confessor,  Alexander,  when  he  with- 
stood Arius,  though  supported  by  Constantine  ;  and 
of  the  saintly  Paul,  who  resisted  Eusebius  of  Nico- 
media,  backed  by  Constantius,  and  v/ho  had  opposed 
Macedonius,  intruded  by  the  same  Emperor  in  A.D. 
351,  and  at  last  died  a  martyr  for  the  faith. 

There  was  one  person  who  seemed  to  satisfy  these 
conditions,  and  to  be  pointed  out  for  the  work.  This 
was  Gregory  Nazianzen,  who  was  now  living  in  re- 
tirement. He  had  been  dwelling  for  three  years  in 
a  monastery  at  Seleucia  in  Isauria/  the  south-east 
corner  of  Asia  Minor,  a  few  miles  to  the  west  of  the 
Cilician  Tarsus,  the  birth-place  of  St.  Paul  the 
Apostle.  He  had  been  the  bosom  friend  of  Basil, 
the  great  Confessor  of  the  faith,  who  had  died  a  i^\N 
days  before  the  accession  of  Theodosius.  He  was 
already  a  Bishop,  having  been  consecrated  by  Basil 
to  the  See  of  Sasima,  and  had  administered  the  affairs 
of  the  Church  of  Nazianzus  as  coadjutor  to  his  father 

"*  Greg.  Naz.  Carm.  xi.  549;  Epist.  Ixxxvii.  clxxxii. 


298     Gregory  Naziajizen  :  his  eloquence  and  sympathy. 

Gregory,  Bishop  of  that  place.  He  was  about  four 
years  older  than  Basil,  and  now  probably  in  his 
fifty-fourth  year.  He  was  also  eminent  for  theolo- 
gical learning,  and  was  distinguished  by  marvellous 
gifts  of  eloquence,  displayed  especially  in  such 
grand  orations  as  that  which  he  had  delivered  soon 
after  his  ordination,^  A.D.  361,  on  the  qualifications 
necessary  for  the  office  of  a  Priest  in  the  Church  of 
God.  Other  sermons  which  had  been  preached  by 
Gregory  at  Nazianzus  had  displayed  his  intellectual 
powers  and  oratorical  gifts,  and  also  his  deep  feelings 
of  sympathy.  His  discourses  on  the  sufferings  of  the 
population  in  consequence  of  a  succession  of  hail- 
storms may  be  compared  with  his  friend  Basil's  homily 
on  dearth  and  drought,^  and  may  supply  profitable 
thoughts  in  times  of  agricultural  distress. 

His  tender  and  loving  disposition  was  seen  in  the 
terms  of  affection  with  which  he  speaks  of  his 
mother,  a  person  of  "  masculine  courage,  blended 
with  woman's  tenderness/'  ^  and  who  instilled  into  her 
children  the  piety  she  had  received  from  her  parents, 
and  vowed  him  to  God's  service  as  a  second   Samuel 

^  A  summary  of  it  may  be  seen  in  the  valuable  article  on  Gregory 
Nazianzen  by  Archdeacon  Watkins,  Prof.  Wace's  Dictionary,  i.  p.  745. 
The  Benedictine  Editor  of  Gregory's  works  (p.  10)  compares  with  this 
oration  Chrysostom's  work  "  De  Sacerdotio,"  and  Gregory  the  Great, 
"De  CuraPastorali,"who  there  refers  to  Gregory  Nazianzen.  The  English 
reader  will  remember  the  parallel  to  it  in  Bishop  Bull's  Sermon  "On 
the  difficulty  and  danger  of  the  Priest's  office,"  Sermon  vi.  p.  137, 

The  Benedictine  edition  of  S.  Gregory's  works,  2  vols,  folio,  of  which 
the  first  volume  appeared  at  Paris  in  1778,  and  the  second  not  till  1842, 
is  a  worthy  sequel  of  the  editions  of  Athanasius,  Basil,  and  Chrysostom, 
for  which  the  Church  is  indebted  to  that  learned  French  Brotherhood 
— some  of  them  friends  of  our  own  Bentley. 

^  Basil,  tom.  ii.  p.  62. 

7  See  Greg.  Naz,  Carm.  Plist.  i.  118.  Gregory's  historical  poems,  which 
are  principally  autobiographical,  form  the  Second  Part  of  his  Poetical 
Works  in  the  Benedictine  edition,  vol.  ii.  pp.  630—996,  ed.  Paris.  1840. 


His  funeral  orations — On  the  intermediate  state.      299 

from  his  birth,^  and  consecrated  him  to  the  study  of 
God's  Holy  Word,^  as  the  most  precious  of  all  earthly 
treasures. 

A  similar  spirit  showed  itself  in  his  funeral  sermons 
on  his  sister  Gorgonia,^  and  on  his  brother  Caejarius,^ 
the  celebrated  physician  of  Constantinople,  who  had 
stood  firm  against  the  solicitations  of  the  Emperor 
Julian,  pressing  him  to  retain  the  honours  and  emolu- 
ments of  the  Court.  In  that  sermon  the  preacher 
speaks  in  words  of  comfort  to  his  mourning  father,  the 
aged  Bishop  of  Nazianzus,  and  to  his  mother  Nonna, 
concerning  his  brother,  their  departed  son,  Caesarius. 
"  I  am  convinced  by  the  words  of  the  wise,"  he  says, 
"that  every  beautiful  and  God-loving  soul^  as  soon 
as  it  is  loosed  from  the  bonds  of  the  body  to  which 
it  has  been  tied  on  earth,  and  departs  hence,  forth- 
with has  a  sight  and  taste  of  the  bliss  that  awaits  it, 
and  is  filled  with  marvellous  delight,  and  exults  with 
joy  ;  and  has  also  imaginative  fruition  of  the  blessed- 
ness in  store  for  it ;  and  that  soon  afterwards  it  will 
receive  again  the  body  with  which  it  has  been  con- 
nate on  earth,  and  with  which  it  has  philosophized 
concerning  the  things  of  hereafter.  That  self-same 
body  will  be  raised  from  the  earth,  to  which  it  has 
been  committed,  and  which  will  give  it  up  (at  the 
resurrection)  in  a  manner  which  God  knows,  Who 
joined  the  soul  and  body  together,  and  severed  the 
one  from  the  other  by  death.  And  then  the  soul 
will  inherit  heavenly  glory  together  with  the  body. 
And  as  the  body  was  a  partner  with  the  soul  in  the 
sorrows  of  this  life,  so  it  will  be  a  sharer  with  the  soul  in 
the  joys  of  the  life  immortal." 

To    these    utterances    of   pious  affection  may   be 

^  Greg.  Naz.  Carm.  v.  425.  ^  Ibid.  44a 

^  Greg.  Orat.  viii.  2  Ibid.  vii. 


300     His  funeral  oration  on  his  father :  his  father's  church. 

Gregory  called  to  Constantinople. 
added  his  funeral  oration  on  his  father,  the  Bishop  of 
Nazianzus,^  who  had  been  mainly  instrumental  in 
promoting  the  election  of  Basil  to  the  Archiepis- 
copal  See  of  Caesarea/  and  was  more  than  a  hundred 
years  old  at  the  time  of  his  death.  This  oration  was 
delivered  by  Gregory,  in  the  presence  of  his  widowed 
mother  Nonna,  and*  of  his  friend  Basil,  in  a  magni- 
ficent Church  which  had  been  built  at  Nazianzus  by 
his  father,  chiefly  at  his  own  expense  ;  the  description 
of  which  is  given  minutely  by  Gregory,^  and  may  be 
interesting  to  Church  architects.  It  was  an  octagon,^ 
and  had  two  tiers  of  porches  and  columns,  sur- 
mounted by  life-like  statues,  and  was  lighted  from 
above.  It  seems  to  have  been  in  a  form  very  well 
suited  for  preaching,  and  was  probably  not  the  less 
pleasing  to  Gregory  himself  on  that  account. 

Gregory  was  called  to  Constantinople  by  the  in- 
vitation of  the  faithful  in  that  city,  sanctioned  by  the 
voice  of  the  Church,  speaking  by  some  of  her 
Bishops.''  Peter,  successor  of  Athanasius  at  Alex- 
andria, encouraged  him  to  listen  to  the  call,  which 
he  accepted  in  A.D.  379,  with  much  misgiving  as  to  his 
own  qualifications  for  the  enterprise.  He  set  forth, 
however,  strong  in  that  faith  which  he  expressed  in 

'^  Orat.  xviii.        '^  Ibid.  p.  357,  and  see  above,  p.  238.  ^  P.  359. 

"  The  Church  erected  by  Constantine  at  Antioch  was  also  an  octagon, 
Euseb.  V.  c.  iii.  50  ;  that  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  of  Jerusalem  was  round, 
Bingham,  viii.  3  ;  that  of  the  Holy  Apostles  at  Constantinople  was 
cruciform — probably  a  Greek  Cross,  Greg.  Naz.  Carm.  xvi.  e/.  60,  p.  847. 
S.  Basil's  brother,  Gregory  Nyssen,  gives  in  one  of  his  letters  (Epist.  25, 
ed.  Migne,  p.  1095)  a  very  circumstantial  and  interesting  description 
of  a  church  constructed  by  himself  in  the  form  of  a  Cross,  and  yet  in 
a  certain]  sense  octagonal,  by  reason  of  the  two  angles  in  each  of  the  four 
ends  of  the  cross — eyKeirai  to3  aravp^  kvkKos  qkt^  yuviais  SiciAr/M- 
jxeuo^.     Cp.  Gibbon,  vol.  iii.  chap.  xx.  p.  292,  on  ancient  churches. 

^  Greg.  Naz.  Carm.  "  On  his  own  life,"  xi.  858,  Opera,  ii.  p.  718. 


His  prayer  and  voiu— his  chircJi^  Anastasia.  301 

his  prayer:  '' O  divine  Word,  it  is  on  Thee  that  I 
rest ;  with  Thee  I  awake,  and  with  Thee  is  my  lying 
down  and  mine  uprising  ;  for  Thee  I  go  forth  on  my 
journeys,  and  under  Thy  protection  and  guidance. 
Send  forth  one  of  Thine  angels  to  lead  me  with  a 
pillar  of  fire  and  cloud  in  my  pilgrimage,^  and  make 
this  my  rough  and  steep  road  to  be  smooth  and 
easy  to  Thy  servant."  In  his  Vow  offered  to  the 
Divine  Logos  ^  at  the  same  period,  "  I  swear,"  he  says, 
''  by  the  Word  Himself— Who  to  me  is  the  Mighty 
God,  the  Beginning  from  the  Beginning,  the  Almighty 
Father,  and  Equal  to  the  Father.  May  Christ  be 
unpropitious  to  me,  if  I  ever  separate  the  Persons  of 
the  Glorious  Trinity  ;  or  if  I  am  ambitious  of  the 
throne  of  pre-eminence,  or  prefer  the  arm  of  flesh  to 
God,  or  am  guilty  of  pride,  or  hatred,  or  injustice,  or 
of  intemperate  language,  or  of  unkindness  to  the  poor, 
or  if  I  rejoice  in  my  enemy's  fall." 

Happily  Gregory  had  some  relatives  at  Constan- 
tinople who  received  him  hospitably,  and  placed  a 
part  of  their  house  at  his  disposal.  And  since 
all  the  Churches  in  the  city  were  then  occupied  by 
heretics,  he  converted  this  into  a  Chapel,  which  he 
called  Anastasia,  as  the  place  of  the  Resicrrection  of 
the  Faith  at  Constantinople,  after  its  burial  there  for 
forty  years.^  His  fancy  loved  to  disport  itself  in 
playful  similes  of  holy  affection  for  this  dear  abode, 
this  harbour  of  peace  amid  the  storms  of  strife  in  the 


8  See  the  poem  in  Greg.  Naz.  ii.  667,  entitled  ''  Itinerary  to  Con- 
stantinople." 

'  Carm,  ii.  p.  665. 

'  See  his  Verses  to  "Anastasia,"  Carm.  v.  p.  669,  v.  4,  "Who  by 
living  words  didst  raise  up  the  ancient  faith,  slain  by  deadly  words  " 
(i.  e.  of  false  doctrine). 


30  2      His  Congregations  at  A^iastasia — his  Sermons. 

great  city.  It  was  to  him  ''the  Ark  of  Noah  "  in  the 
flood  ; '  the  Christian  "  Shiloh,"  '  where  the  Ark  of  the 
Covenant  rested  after  its  forty  years'  wanderings  ;  it 
was  the  "  Shunammite's  house/'  where  the  prophet  of 
the  Lord  was  entertained  and  sheltered  by  domestic 
piety  and  love  ;  it  was  even  another  Bethlehem/  where 
Christ  was  spiritually  born  in  the  hearts  of  the  faithful. 

This  modest  "  Anastasia "  of  Gregory  soon  be- 
came more  famous  than  the  Cathedral  of  S.  Sophia, 
and  than  the  imperial  Church  of  the  Holy  Apostles 
at  Constantinople.  It  was  thronged  by  devout  wor- 
shippers, who  rejoiced  to  hear  once  more  the  preach- 
ing of  those  Catholic  truths — especially  the  Godhead 
of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  doctrine 
of  the  Blessed  Trinity — which  had  been  banished 
from  the  city  during  the  reign  of  Valens,  and  since  the 
accession  of  Constantius. 

The  crowds  which  flocked  from  without,  and  pressed 
from  within,  the  Church,  to  hear  the  voice  of  the 
preacher  proclaiming  those  verities  of  the  Gospel,  and 
the  orderly  arrangement  of  its  Priests,  seated  on  each 
side  of  the  Bishop,  and  the  Deacons  in  their  "  shining 
vestments,"  and  the  goodly  companies  of  "  chaste 
virgins  and  grave  matrons  "  in  their  proper  places  in 
the  Church,  not  only  cheered  and  delighted  him  by 
day,  but  haunted  his  dreams  by  night.^  He  began 
his  work  at  Constantinople  by  a  message  of  Peace.^ 
*'  God,"  says  he,  "  specially  rejoices  in  revealing  Him- 
self to  the  world  as  Love.^  We  who  worship  Him  Who 

2  Greg.  Carm.  xi.  1081.  ^  Orat.  xlii.  p.  766. 

*  Carm.  xvi.  62. 

^  See  his  Poem  entitled  "  Dream  on  Anastasia,"  Carm.  xvi.  p.  843  ; 
cp.  Carm.  xv.  v.  49. 

^  See  his  two  orations  entitled  etpTjvt/coi,  Orat.  xxii.  and  xxiii.  pp.  415 
— 434.  7  I  John  iv.  16. 


Sermofis  on  Peace — on  theological  speculation,  303 
and  controversy. 
is  Love,  why  do  we  hate  one  another  ?  We  who  preach 
peace,  why  do  we  wage  war  ?  We  who  adore  Him 
Who  is  the  Rock  and  the  Corner  Stone,  why  are  we 
shaken  and  distracted  by  strifes  ?  Our  discords  are  the 
enemy's  triumphs.  Our  tragedies  are  their  comedies. 
However,  through  good  report  and  evil  report,  I  will 
remain  always  the  same.  We  who  are  Catholics,  let  us 
prove  that  we  are  so,  by  sound  doctrine  and  brotherly 
love." 

In  dealing  with  the  mysteries  of  the  Faith,  he  de- 
precated curious  speculation.  "  Thou  hearest  of  the 
Son's  Generation,^  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit's  Pro- 
cession from  the  Father  ;  do  not  pry  inquisitively 
into  the  manner  of  this  Generation  and  of  that  Pro- 
cession. If  thou  dost,  then  I  may  also  pry  inquisitively 
into  the  manner  of  the  union  of  thy  soul  and  body, 
and  ask,  *  Hozv  art  thou  thyself  dust,  and  yet  the 
imao-e  of  God  .'*  What  is  it  that  moves  thee,  and 
what  is  that  which  is  moved  in  thee  }  How  does  thy 
mind  dwell  in  thee,  and  produce  words  in  the  mind 
of  another  }  How  is  thought  imparted  by  sounds  ? 
And  if  thou  dost  not  comprehend  the  nature  of 
visible  things,  such  as  sky  and  sea,  and  how  they 
exist,  why  dost  thou  pry  curiously  into  the  manner 
of  the  being  of  God  t '  " 

Gregory  did  not  begin  with  controversial  preaching. 
His  mission,  as  we  have  said,  was  a  mission  of  peace. 
His  message  was  a  message  of  love.^  At  the  same 
time,  he  did  not  disguise  from  his  hearers  that  there 
can  be  no  true  Peace  which  is  not  built  upon  Truth. 

He  therefore  next  proceeded  to  deliver  a  series 
of  sermons  on  "  Theology.'^  He  declared  that  holi- 
ness of  life   is  the   only  path  to    divine  knowledge. 

**  Orat.  XX.  p.  38.  '■'  Orat.  xxii.  xxiii.      On  Peace. 


304  Talk  an  Theology — Need  of  JVork. 

''  Wouldest  thou  become  a  theologian  ?  keep  the 
commandments.  Holy  practice  is  the  ladder  to 
heavenly  contemplation."^  He  told  his  hearers  that 
the  popular  gossip  at  Constantinople  on  religious 
subjects,  mingled  in  a  grotesque  and  fantastic  medley 
with  familiar  talk  in  saloons  and  boudoirs  and 
at  dinner-tables,  at  concerts  and  at  operas,^  concern- 
ing the  races  in  the  circus,  or  the  plays  in  the  theatre, 
could  never  lead  any  one  to  real  knowledge  of  sacred 
Truth,  and  still  less  to  a  deep  sense  of  its  awful  gran- 
deur and  divine  beauty.  "  What  is  the  use,"  he 
asked,  ''  of  speaking  on  the  mysteries  of  the  Incar- 
nation to  people  v/hose  minds  are  tainted  by  vicious 
indulgence  .^  Every  one  nowadays  aspires  to  be  a 
theologian.  But  men  and  women  had  better  begin 
with  doing  good  works ;  with  taming  their  own 
passions,  and  regulating  their  own  lives.  In  order 
that  the  mind  may  be  clear,  the  heart  must  be 
clean.  If  we  desire  to  know  the  truth  and  to  under- 
stand divine  things,  why  do  we  let  loose  our  tongues 
in  talking,  and  tie  our  hands  from  working  }  Why 
— if  we  must  talk — do  we  not  talk  about  mutual 
love — love  of  the  brethren,  love  of  husbands  and 
wives  ;  holy  virginity,  care  for  the  poor  ?  Why  do  we 
not  practise  the  singing  of  psalms,  and  nightly  vigils, 
and  penitential  tears,  and  fasting  }  Why  do  we  not 
go  forth  in  our  souls  soaring  upwards  from  our  bodies 
in  holy  communion  with  God  .''  "  ^ 

He  proceeds  to  show  that   man  is  unable  of  him- 


'  $ov\ei  6eo\6yos  ylyveaOai ;  tcls  iuroXas  (pvKacrcri'  irpa^is  inl^aais 
Oeceplas.  This  sentence  is  in  Orat.  xx.  p.  383,  which  is  preliminary  to 
those  on  Theology,  but  expresses  the  meaning  here. 

^  Orat.  xxvii.  pp.  488,  489.     Cp.  his  autobiographical  Poem,  v.  12 15 

—  1225,  p.  739.  3    p.  492. 


God  in  Nature — in  Scripture.      Godhead  of  the  Son  and  305 

Holy  Ghost. 
self  to  discover  divine  truth  ;  he  cannot  by  his  own 
powers  solve  the  problem  of  his  own  existence,  and 
of  that  of  the  creatures  around  him.  Man  needs 
revelation  from  God  for  the  discernment  of  spiritual 
things.  God  is  also  seen  in  His  works."*  The  animal 
creation,  the  beasts  of  the  field,  the  fowls  of  the 
air,  the  fishes  of  the  sea  ;  fruits,  flowers,  trees,  and 
minerals  ;  the  sky,  sun,  moon  and  stars  ;  the  wind,  the 
lightning  and  earthquakes  ;  Men  and  Angels,  and 
Archangels  ;  all  these  are  Preachers  of  God.''' 

He  then  appeals  to  Holy  Scripture,  and  establishes 
from  it  the  true  faith,  in  opposition  to  the  errors 
which  depraved  it,  and  which  were  propagated  by 
Arius  and  his  followers. 

"  If  the  Son  and  Holy  Spirit  are  co-eternal  with  the 
Father,"  say  the  objectors,  ''how  are  they  not  without 
an  ap'^y]  or  beginning  } "  The  reason,  replies  Gregory, 
is  because  they  2,x^  from  the  Father  in  origin,  but  are 
not  after  the  Father  in  time.  As  to  their  cause,  they 
are  not  without  an  apyf)  or  principle,  but  the  cause  is 
not  necessarily  prior  to  that  of  which  it  is  a  cause. 
The  Sun  is  the  cause  of  its  rays,  but  the  Sun's  rays 
are  not  posterior  in  time  to  the  Sun. 

He  states  the  objections  to  the  Catholic  faith  con- 
cerning the  Divine  Person  of  the  Son,  and  confutes 
them.^ 

''The  Son  of  God  exists  above  you,  and  existed 
before  you.  What  He  was  from  eternity,  that  He 
still  remains — God.  But  what  He  was  not  before, 
that  He  is  now — Man.  As  God  He  was  without  a 
cause.  But  His  Manhood  has  a  cause — the  salvation 
of  your  souls."  ^ 

-i  P.  513.  *  Oiat.  XXX.  «  p.  537. 

VOL.   II.  X 


o6  TJie  two  A^a lures,  and  one  Pei'son,  of  Christ. 


The  two  natures  of  Christ,  Very  God  and  Very- 
Man,  in  one  Person,  are  described  in  language  which 
may  remind  us  of  that  of  S.  Hippolytus."^  "  Christ 
was  baptized  as  Man,^  but  took  away  our  sins  as 
God.  He  was  baptized,  not  that  He  needed  cleans- 
ing, but  in  order  to  sanctify  water,  that  we  might  be 
cleansed  by  it.^  He  suffered  hunger,^  and  fed  thou- 
sands, and  is  the  living  Bread.  He  suffered  thirst, 
and  said,  '  If  any  man  thirst,  let  him  come  unto  Me 
and  drink.'  He  suffered  weariness,  and  said,  '  Come 
unto  Me,  all  ye  that  are  weary,  and  I  will  give  you  rest.' 
He  was  called  '  a  Samaritan,'  and  '  a  Devil  ;*  but 
He  was  the  good  Samaritan  Who  succoured  the 
wounded  traveller ;  and  He  cast  out  devils,  and  is 
feared  by  them.  He  prays_,  and  hears  prayer.  He 
weeps,  and  wipes  away  tears.  He  was  sold  for 
thirty  pieces  of  silver,  and  has  bought  the  world  with 
His  blood.  He  was  nailed  to  the  tree  and  died, 
and  gives  us  life  immortal  by  death  on  the  tree.  He 
gave  up  the  ghost,  and  laid  down  His  life,  and  has 
power  to  take  it  again.^  He  died,  and  gives  us  life 
by  His  death,  and  destroys  death  thereby.  He 
descended  to  Hades,  and  brought  up  souls  from  it. 
He  rose  again,  and  ascended  into  heaven,  and  will 
come  again  to  judge  the  quick  and  dead."  Gregory 
concludes  with  a  prayer  for  the  heretics  whom  he  is 
refuting. 

"  See  above,  vol.  i.  p.  298.  ^  p^  ^^g^ 

^  Gregory's  doctrine  on  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism  may  be  seen 
clearly  expressed  in  his  Oration  on  Baptism,  Orat.  xl.  torn.  i.  p.  691, 
and  in  his  Carmen  xii.  v.  449,  476,  p.  803,  where  he  says  that  baptism 
is  the  cleansing  away  of  sins,  but  not  the  total  abolition  of  evil  rpoiros, 
and  is  the  purgation  of  sins  we  /lave  committed,  but  not  of  sins  which 
Tiv  coiTunit. 

'  John  iv.  6  ;  V.  41  ;  vii.  37  ;  xiv.  21  ;  xix.  28.      INIatt.  xi.  28. 

2  John  X.  18. 


On  the  Godhead  and  Personality  of  the  Holy  Ghost.   2,0  j 

He  reserved  as  the  subject  for  the  fifth  and 
last  of  this  series  of  discourses  on  Theology,^  the 
doctrine  of  the  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  He 
shows  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  not,  according  to  the 
Sabellians,  merely  an  accident  or  quality  of  the  God- 
head ;  but  that  He  is  a  Person  Who  acts,  and  He  is  a 
divine  Person,  because  we  are  to  be  baptized  into  His 
Name  as  well  as  into  the  Person  of  the  Father  and  of 
the  Son  ;  and  if  the  Father  and  Son  are  divine  Persons 
(as  the  Macedonians  themselves  acknowledged),  so  is 
the  Holy  Ghost. 

The  Macedonians  replied,  that  if  the  Holy  Spirit 
is  God,  He  must  have  been  either  begotten  or  not. 
If  He  has  not  been  begotten,  then  (they  said)  there 
are  two  fountains  of  Godhead;  and  if  He  has  been 
begotten.  He  has  been  generated  either  by  the  Father 
or  by  the  Son.  If  by  the  Father,  then  the  P'ather 
has  two  Sons.  If  by  the  Son,  then  the  Holy  Spirit 
is  Grandson  to  the  Father. 

But  Gregory  denies  the  premisses.  The  Holy 
Spirit  is  not  begotten  of  the  Father  or  the  Son,  but, 
as  the  Scripture  teaches.  He  proceeds  from  the 
Father.  In  that  He  was  not  begotten,  He  is  not  a 
Son  ;  in  that  He  proceeds  eternally  from  the  Father, 
He  is  God.  What  the  manner  of  this  eternal  pro- 
cession is,  can  no  more  be  explained  than  the  manner 
of  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son  from  the  Father. 

The  Old  Testament  ^  (he  says)  spake  more  clearly 
of  the  Father  than  of  the  Son.  The  New  Testament 
spake  more  clearly  of  the  Son  till  the  time  of  His 
Ascension,  when  He  sent  the  Holy  Spirit  from  heaven 
to  abide  for  ever  with  His  Church ;  and  the  Holy 
Spirit  now  shows   Himself  by  His  working  in   His 

3  Orat.  xxxi.  4  Orat.  xxi.  p.  572. 

X    2 


3o8  Gregory  — "  the  TheGlogian'' 

Church,  and  by  that  working,  and  by  the  testimony 
of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  He  shows  Himself  to  be  God. 
And  thus  (by  these  distinct  and  successive  revela- 
tions) we  are  brought  to  behold  the  full  glory  of  the 
Ever-Blessed  Trinity,  Three  distinct  Divine  Persons, 
co-equal,  consubstantial,  and  eternal,  in  One  God. 

These  orations  obtained  for  Gregory  the  title  of 
6  OeoXoyofy,  "  the  Theologianr  This  honourable  desig- 
nation was  due  in  considerable  degree  to  the  peculiar 
character  of  the  time  in  which  he  delivered  tliem.  If 
the  circumstances  had  been  the  same  in  the  days  of 
S.  Athanasius,  or  of  S.  Basil,  either  of  them  might 
have  preoccupied  that  title,  and  have  been  recognized 
as  the  Theologian  of  the  Church.  Gregory  was  called 
upon  to  wage  war  against  the  Macedonians  at  Con- 
stantinople, where  their  leader  had  occupied  the 
Archiepiscopal  See.  The  PneiunatoinacJii,  as  they  were 
called,  "the  enemies  of  the  Holy  Spirit,"  were,  in  a 
certain  sense,  though  against  their  will,  instrumental  in 
procuring  for  Gregory  that  illustrious  title  of  the  TJieo- 
logian,  by  his  victory  over  them ;  which  not  only  gained 
for  the  Church  the  explicit  declaration  of  the  true  faith 
in  the  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  also  by  a  neces- 
sary consequence  consummated  her  theological  sys- 
tem, revealed  from  the  beginning  in  Holy  Scripture 
and  believed  by  the  faithful,  but  not  as  yet  formulated 
and  promulgated  by  her  in  her  Creed,  in  the  acknow- 
ledgment of  the  Glory  of  the  Eternal  Trinity,  and 
in  the  worship  of  the  Divine  Unity. 

"  We  avoid,"  he  says,^  "  all  contentious  distractions 
and  excesses  of  reaction  in  doctrine ;  we  neither 
Sabellianize  against  the  Three  Persons,  and  destroy 
their  distinct  personality,  by  means  of  an  heretical 

*  Orat.  xlii,  p.  759. 


The  Cliurch  holds  the  mean  hetweeii  Sabellianism  and  309 
Arianisni — Festival  of  the  Maccabees. 
Unity  ;  nor  do  we  Arianize  against  the  Divine  Unity 
by  means  of  three  unequal  Persons,  and  destroy  that 
Unity  by  an  heretical  Diversity.  We  do  not  try 
to  cure  one  disease  by  another ;  but  we  walk  in  the 
middle  and  royal  way  between  the  two  extremes. 
We  believe  in  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  of 
the  same  substance,  and  equal  in  Glory,  in  Whom 
Baptism  is  consummated  both  in  word  and  deed. 
We  confess  the  Unity  in  substance,  and  in  equal 
participation  of  worship  ;  and  we  confess  also  the 
distinction  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  in  three 
hypostases  ox  persons — either  of  those  two  terms  being 
allowable."  ^ 

Gregory  also  delivered  at  Constantinople  two  ora- 
tions very  seasonable  for  the  time;  one  on  the  Mac- 
cabees, probably  on  their  festival,  August  \^  the 
day  on  which  they  are  commemorated  in  the  Greek 
Church.  The  triumphs  of  holy  valour  and  faith  in 
those  noble  Confessors  of  the  ancient  Hebrew  Church, 
Judas  Maccabseus  and  his  brethren,  in  their  struggle 
against  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  the  cleansing  and 
restoration  of  the  Temple  by  them  after  its  desecra- 
tion, offered  a  magnificent  theme  for  his  splendid 
eloquence  at  that  crisis,  when  he  himself  was  engaged 
in  a  similar  work  at  Constantinople.^ 

The  second   oration  was  on  Athanasius,^  to  which 

^  Cp.  his  oration  on  Athanasius,  Orat.  xxi.  p.  410. 

'  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  observance  of  this  Festival  of  the 
Maccabees,  which  is  still  maintained  in  the  Greek  and  Latin  Churches, 
has  not  been  continued  in  the  Anglican  Churches.  Such  a  festival 
would  be  very  suggestive  of  many  salutary  teachings,  warnings,  and 
encouragements  in  these  latter  days. 

•*  May  I  be  permitted  to  refer  to  two  Sermons  on  the  Maccabees  with 
reference  to  the  Christian  Church  and  the  Church  of  England,  preached 
by  me  at  Cambridge  and  published  in  1871  ? 

^  Orat.  xxi.    Probably  delivered  on  his  festival,  May  2,  A.U.379  or  380. 


3IO     Gregoiy  on  Athanasius—on  Cyprian — Jei'ome  a 

scholar  of  Gregoiy — Gregory's  troubles. 
some  references  have  been  already  made.^  The  de- 
scription of  the  conflicts  of  Athanasius  for  the  faith 
during  forty-seven  years,  and  of  his  triumphal  entry 
into  Alexandria  after  his  long  battle  for  it,  could 
hardly  fail  to  have  a  special  interest  for  Gregory's 
audience  as  well  as  for  Gregory  himself.^ 

S.  Jerome^  now  about  thirty-four  years  of  age,  the 
friend  of  Pope  Damasus,  and  of  PauUinus  the  Bishop 
of  Antioch,  who  was  favoured  by  the  Westerns  (as 
Meletius  was  by  the  Easterns),  and  by  whom  he 
was  admitted  to  the  priesthood,  was  now  at  Con- 
stantinople, and  he  was  among  the  hearers  and 
scholars  of  Gregory  at  this  time.  "  I  glory  and  exult " 
(he  said  afterwards)  "■  in  such  a  master  as  that.  I  was 
trained  in  the  study  of  the  Holy  Scripture  by  that 
holy  man,  who  was  then  Bishop  of  that  city ;  one  of 
the  most  eloquent  of  mortals."  ^ 

But  all  did  not  go  on  smoothly.  Gregory  was  shy 
and  reserved  in  his  manner,  fond  of  seclusion,  ab- 
stemious, severe,  and  ascetic  ;  he  had  not  personal 
gifts  for  winning  popular  influence.  His  Arian  ene- 
mies, who  were  devoted  to  their  own  Bishop  Demo- 
philus,  took  advantage  of  his  gentleness,  and  mis- 
interpreted   his    teaching.*      He    was    mobbed    and 

1  See  above,  pp.  29,  108,  222. 

2  A  third  oration  of  Gregory,  namely,  *'  On  S.Cyprian  "  (Orat.  xxiv.), 
has  been  connected  by  some  with  the  name  of  the  martyred  Arch- 
bishop of  Carthage,  but  it  seems  rather  to  refer  to  another  Cyprian  (of 
Antioch,  who  suffered  at  Nicomedia  ;  see  the  Benedictine  note,  p.  437  ; 
Tillemont,  ix.  p.  712  ;  Bp.  Benson  in  Wace's  Diet.  i.  755).  It  is  true  that 
Gregory  speaks  of  his  birth  at  Carthage,  and  of  his  suffering  persecution 
under  Decius — incidents  which  do  not  suit  the  other  Cyprian  ;  but,  as 
we  have  already  seen  (on  Hippolytus,  chap,  ix.),  Easterns  had  not 
always  very  clear  notions  of  Western  Church  History. 

■*  S.  Jerome,  Scr.  Eccl.  117  in  Esaiam  vi. 

^  See  his  autobiographical  Poem,  Carm.  xi.  650 — 720,  on  the  treat- 
ment he  received  from  them  at  Constantinople. 


Gregory  tmdermined  by  Maximus.  311 

pelted  at  In  the  streets.^  They  charged  him  with 
bringing  back  polytheism  ;  his  chapel  was  attacked 
and  desecrated  ;  he  was  even  brought  before  a  magis- 
trate for  causing  a  riot  in  which  he  himself  was  almost 
a  victim,  and  narrowly  escaped  assassination.^ 

But  there  were  worse  troubles  from  within.  One 
of  his  own  congregation  worked  more  mischief  than 
any  of  his  Arian  enemies.  This  was  Maximus,  the 
Cynic  philosopher,^  an  Egyptian,  who  had  been 
ordained  to  the  priesthood,  and  who  made  professions 
of  superior  sanctity  by  a  semblance  of  self-mortifica- 
tion, and  pretended  to  have  received  wounds  for  his 
valiant  confession  of  the  faith  in  persecution.  He 
seems  to  have  had  some  literary  merits  and  theo- 
logical knowledge.  S.  Jerome^  says  that  Maximus 
"  wrote  a  remarkable  book  on  faith  against  the 
Arians,  which  he  presented  to  the  Emperor  Gratian 
at  Milan."  Maximus  was  an  assiduous  attendant  on 
Gregory's  preaching,  and  was  enthusiastic  in  his 
admiration  of  his  eloquence  ;  ^  he  was  admitted  to  his 
house  and  his  table,  his  studies  and  his  counsels  ;  and 
so  fully  did  he  gain  his  confidence,  that  Gregory  even 
made  him  the  subject  of  a  panegyric  in  one  of  his 
orations  to  his  people.^ 

5  Ibid,  and  Carm.  xv.  ir.  Cp.  Hefele,  Concilien-Gescliiclite, 
ii,  p.  2  ;  and  for  the  history  generally,  his  Abhandlung  iiber  Gregor. 
von  Nazianz.  in  Wetzer's  Kirchenlexicon,  iv.  736. 

^  Orat.  xxiii.  XXXV. ;  Epist.  Ixxvii.  ;  Carm.  xi.  1445—74. 

7  For  a  description  of  Maximus,  and  of  the  arts  by  which  he  tried  to 
supplant  Gregory,  see  Gregory's  autobiographical  Poem,  v.  750—980, 
P-7I3- 

8  S.  Jerome,  Scr.  Eccl.  127. 
^  Greg.  Naz.  Carm.  xi.  814. 

1  Orat.  XXV.  p.  451,  "In  laudem  Heronis  philosophi."  S.Jerome 
Scr.  Eccl.  117.  Jerome  (the  scholar  of  Gregory  at  Constantinople) 
asserts  that  this  oration  was  an  eulogy  on  Maximus. 


312        Consecration  of  Maximus  at  Coiistantinoph — 
Tlieodosius  baptized  by  Ascholius. 

In  the  mean  time  Maximus  was  undermining 
Gregory,  and  scheming  for  his  own  advancement. 
The  Emperor  Theodosius  was  expected  at  Constanti- 
nople. No  Catholic  Bishop  had  been  consecrated  to 
its  see.  Gregory  was  too  modest  to  claim  that 
honour  for  himself  Why  should  not  Maximus  (he 
bethought  himself),  trading  upon  Gregory's  coUauda- 
tion  of  him,  and  on  the  recommendation  he  had  by 
some  means  or  other  obtained  from  Gregory's  own 
friend,^  Peter  of  Alexandria,  the  successor  of  Athana- 
sius,  present  himself  to  the  Emperor  as  Bishop  desig- 
nate of  Constantinople  }  But  how  \vas  he  to  be  con- 
secrated, and  where  t  He  summoned  some  friends, 
five  suffragans  of  Peter  from  Alexandria,  and  watch- 
ing his  opportunity,  at  night,  when  Gregory  was  ill  in 
bed,  Maximus  procured  himself  to  be  consecrated 
Bishop  of  Constantinople  in  Gregory's  own  chapel, 
Anastasia. 

But  he  had  miscalculated  his  influence.  The 
Catholics  rose  up  against  him  in  a  body  ;  he  fled 
from  Constantinople,  and  hastened  to  make  an 
appeal  to  the  Emperor,  who  was  at  Thessalonica. 

Theodosius  had  been  detained  there  for  a  short 
time  by  illness.  He  profited  by  his  sickness,  and  by 
the  counsel  of  Ascholius,^  the  venerable  Bishop  of 
that  city,  the  friend  of  S.  Basil  and  S.  Ambrose,  and 
received  baptism  *  at  his  hands  ;  he  was  soon  restored 

2  Greg.  Carm.  xi.  v.  858,  1015.  Theodoret,  v.  8,  says  that  it  was 
Timotheus,  the  successor  of  Peter,  who  favoured  Maximus.  Peter  died 
about  this  time. 

3  The  etymology  of  this  Bishop's  name  is  doubtful.  It  is  written 
diversely  in  the  MSS.  (Ascholius,  Acholius,  Ascolius).  It  may  be  from 
crxoAr?,  x'^^^i  ^^  (tko\i6s.  In  the  beautiful  portrait  of  him  by  S. 
Ambrose  (Epist.  16)  he  is  called  Acholius. 

^  Socr.  V.  6.     Sozom.  vii.  4. 


Laivs  of  Theodosius  on  religion  :  his  answer  to  Maxuniis  313 

— consults  Damasus. 
to  health,  and   gained  some  victories  over  the  Goths 
in  Macedonia. 

At  Thessalonica  he  put  forth  an  edict,  dated 
February  27,  A.D.  380,  addressed  to  the  people  of  Con- 
stantinople, in  which  he  declared  his  belief  in  the 
Godhead  of  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost, 
in  equal  Majesty  and  divine  Trinity  ;  and  com- 
manded that  the  name  of  Catholic  Christians  should 
be  applied  only  to  those  who  held  that  faith,  and 
expressed  his  desire  that  all  his  subjects  should  follow 
that  faith  as  taught  by  Damasus,  Bishop  of  Rome, 
and  by  Peter,  Bishop  of  Alexandria.^  He  put  forth 
another  edict  at  the  same  place  on  March  27,  in  which 
he  ordered  that  criminal  proceedings  should  not  be 
instituted  in  Lent. 

Maximus  ^  met  Theodosius,  who  was  on  his 
route  from  Thessalonica,  attended  by  Ascholius,  to 
Constantinople.  Theodosius  had  more  shrewdness 
than  Gregory.  He  told  Ascholius  to  inquire  into 
the  case,  and  to  apply  to  Damasus  for  information 
and  advice.  The  answer  of  Damasus  was  soon 
given.  He^  summarily  repudiated  Maximus,  and 
advised  the  Emperor  to  summon  a  Council  of  Bishops 
at  Constantinople,  for  the  purpose  of  settling  the 
affairs  of  the  Church,  and  of  appointing  and  con- 
secrating an  orthodox  Bishop  for  that  see.  Thus 
incidentally  the  grotesque  Episcopate  of  Maximus, 
and  his  clandestine  ordination  in  Gregory's  Chapel, 
were  overruled  for  permanent  good  to  the  Church. 

5  Cod.  Theodos.  xvi.  i,  2.  He  omitted  the  Patriarch  of  Antioch, 
t1ie  Episcopal  throne  of  that  city  being  disputed  by  two  Catholic 
Bishops,  Meletius  and  PauUinus. 

^  Greg.  Carm.  xi.  1 005. 

'  Concil.  General,  iv.  1699.  CoUectio  Holstenii  Veterum  Rom. 
Eccl.  Mon.  pp.  37—43. 


314  Theodosius  convenes  the  Council  of  Constantinople — 
his  offer  to  Gregory. 

Theodosius  followed  the  advice  of  Damasus  ;  he 
arrived  at  Constantinople,  November  24,  A.D.  380, 
and  not  long  afterwards  he  summoned  a  Synod  for 
the  month  of  May  in  the  following  year. 

In  his  desire  for  peace,  he  invited  Demophilus,^ 
the  Arian  Bishop  of  Constantinople,  to  a  conference, 
and  interrogated  him  whether  he  would  subscribe 
the  Creed  of  Nicaea.  Demophilus  declined  to  do  so, 
and  left  the  city. 

On  the  26th  of  November  the  Churches  of  Constan- 
tinople were  restored  by  an  imperial  decree  to  the 
Catholics,  who  had  been  excluded  from  them  for  forty 
years. 

Gregory  Nazianzen,  who  was  vexed  with  himself 
for  his  creduHty,  and  distressed  by  its  unhappy  con- 
sequence, and  had  retired  into  the  country  for  a 
short  time,  was  also  preparing  to  quit  Constantinople 
altogether.  But  his  faithful  flock  implored  him  to 
stay.  He  addressed  them  on  his  return  from  the 
country  in  an  oration,^  where,  without  mentioning  the 
name  of  Maximus,  he  speaks  of  the  severe  trials 
which  he  and  they  had  recently  passed  through,  and 
contrasts  the  true  Christian  philosopher  with  the 
specious  counterfeit  bearing  that  title. 

The  Emperor  also  generously  acknowledged  the 
services  which  he  had  rendered  to  the  true  faith,  and 
said  to  him,  "  Constantinople  has  need  of  you,  and 
God  makes  use  of  me  to  give  you  this  Church."^ 
The  people  ^  insisted  on  his  accepting  the  offer,  and 
the  Emperor  conducted  him  to  the  Church. 

8  Socr.  V.  7.     Sozom,  vii.  5.  '■'  Orat.  xxvi.  p.  471. 

1  For  the  history,  see  Gregory's  autobiographical   Poem,  xi.  1275  — 

1315.?-  743- 
3  Ibid.  1315-1319-     Cp.  1370. 


Gregory  with  the  Emperor  in  S.  Sophia.  3 1 5 

It  was  a  dark  November  morning,  Nov.  26,  380  ;^ 
the  city  was  wrapped  in  a  dense  fog.  The  Church  of 
S.  Sophia  was  thronged  with  a  vast  multitude  of 
people,  and  with  armed  soldiers.  Theodosius  and 
Gregory  entered  the  chancel  together.  The  service 
of  prayer  and  praise  began,  and  when  the  chant  of  the 
Psalms  pealed  forth,  the  sun  broke  out  from  the  gloom 
and  lighted  up  the  Church  with  a  sudden  splendour, 
which  shone,  says  Gregory,  as  with  a  lightning  flash, 
and  reminded  him  of  the  glories  of  the  ancient  Taber- 
nacle illumined  by  divine  splendour,  and  filled  his 
heart  with  joy. 

A  sound  like  thunder  echoed  through  the  Church 
from  the  whole  multitude,  demanding  Gregory  for  their 
Bishop.  He  was  unable  to  address  the  people,  but  re- 
quested one  of  the  priests  to  speak  for  him  what  he  had 
to  say  :  "  Brethren,  be  still :  now  is  the  time  for  praising 
God  ;  there  will  be  another  season  for  other  things." 

Gregory  was  put  in  possession  of  the  Episcopal 
palace  and  revenues  by  the  Emperor,  and  was  gene- 
rally recognized  by  the  people  as  Bishop  designate  of 
Constantinople,  but  as  yet  the  popular  choice  had  not 
been  sanctioned  by  the  Church.  Soon  afterwards  he 
preached  to  the  people,  and  in  the  presence  of  the 
Emperor,  on  his  own  position  at  Constantinople.  He 
had  come  thither  (he  said)  solely  by  invitation,  to 
revive  the  true  faith,  and  he  disclaimed  *  any  ambitious 
aspirations  for  the  high  and  responsible  office  in  which 
he  had  been  placed. 

He  made  a  bold  appeal  to  the  Emperor  himself,  as 
the  deputy  and  vicegerent  of  God.    "  Confer  honour," 

3  For  the  history,  see  Gregory's  autobiographical  Poem,  xi.  1325— 

1 390,  p.  745- 

4  See  Orat.  xxxvi.,  preached  in  December,  a.d.  3^0. 


3  1 6    Gregory's  Sermon  to  Theodosiiis — his  reforms — SerjuoJis 

on  Baptism.  CJmstmas^  Epiphany. 
he  said,  "  on  the  purple  which  you  wear.  Recognize 
the  trust  committed  to  your  care  ;  the  secret  of  your 
power  is  in  remembering  that  the  things  above  are  of 
God  ;  you  share  with  Him  in  things  below.  Place 
not  your  confidence  in  your  gold  and  in  your  Legions, 
but  in  your  faith  and  obedience  to  Him.  And  you 
Nobles,  be  loyal  to  your  Prince,  but  first  of  all  be  true 
to  God.  You,  who  boast  the  splendour  of  your  lineage, 
illustrate  it  by  your  virtues.  And  you,  Philosophers 
and  Sophists,  who  court  popular  applause,  what  name 
will  befit  you,  if  you  lack  the  first  of  all  sciences,  the 
wisdom  from  above  }  And  you,  people  of  this  great 
city,  the  first  city  in  the  world,  next  to  the  first  of  all 
(Rome),  show  yourselves  to  be  first  in  your  lives  and 
virtues,  and  not  in  licentiousness  and  vice." 

The  reforms  which  Gregory  made  in  the  Church  of 
Constantinople,  especially  in  its  public  services,  are 
described  by  himself  in  his  farewell  oration,^  and  are 
celebrated  by  an  illustrious  contemporary  in  the  West, 
S.  Ambrose,  Bishop  of  Milan. ^  His  noble  beneficence, 
his  unsparing  liberality  of  his  Episcopal  revenues  in 
works  of  charity,  gave  a  dignity  to  his  Episcopate 
which  his  enemies  envied,  but  did  not  appreciate. 

On  the  25th  of  December,  380,  being  Christmas 
Day,  he  preached  on  the  Mystery  of  the  Incarnation, 
and  on  the  manner  in  which  it  is  to  be  celebrated.^ 
Two  other  orations/  on  the  Baptism  of  Christ,  and  on 

^  Orat.  xlii. 

6  Ambrose  de  Spiritu  Sancto,  Prolog.,  on  the  change  wrought  at 
Constantinople  by  Gregory. 

7  Orat.  xxxviii.  The  Benedictine  Editors  affirm  that,  in  the  East  as 
well  as  in  the  West,  the  Nativity  was  then  celebrated  on  this  day, 
Dec.  25.  Cp.  Neander,  iii.  416.  The  visit  of  the  Magi  and  the 
Baptism  of  Christ  (and  afterwards  the  Miracle  at  Cana)  were  comme- 
morated on  Jan.  6,  ibid.  p.  415. 

8  Orat.  xxxix.  xl.  pp.  661  —  729  ;  and  cp.  above,  o.  306. 


Eccksidstical  Legislation  of  Theodosius.  3 1 7 

the  spiritual  gifts  and  graces  bestowed  in  the  Sacra- 
ment of  Holy  Baptism,  and  on  the  danger  of  delay  of 
Baptism,  and  on  the  Baptism  of  young  children,  were 
delivered  by  him  at  Constantinople  on  January  6 
and  January  7,  A.D.  381. 

On  the  loth  of  January,  A.D.  381^  the  Churches  of 
the  Eastern  Empire  were  assigned  by  an  imperial 
decree  to  the  Catholics  who  confessed  the  faith  of 
Nicaea ;  and  the  heresies  of  Photinus_,  Arius,  and 
Eunomius  were  condemned.  It  defined  as  professors 
of  the  true  faith,  "  those  persons  who  confessed  the 
Almighty  God,  and  Christ  His  Son,  God  with  Him, 
God  of  God,  and  Light  of  Light  ;  and  who  do  not 
wrong  the  Holy  Spirit  by  depriving  Him  of  co-equal 
glory.  In  a  word,  those  who  acknowledge  with  a  pure 
faith,  and  with  no  alteration,  the  undivided  substance 
of  the  Holy  Trinity."  No  public  assembly  of  heretics 
was  tolerated  within  the  precincts  of  towns. 

In  consequence  of  this  edict,  the  Catholic  Bishops 
were  restored  to  their  sees  ;  and  no  separate  religious 
body  possessed  any  Ecclesiastical  organization  visible 
to  the  eye,  except  the  few  followers  of  Paullinus  at 
Antioch  who  were  Catholics,  being  supported  by 
Western  influence,  but  held  aloof  from  communion 
with  Meletius,  who  had  been  consecrated  to  the  See  of 
Antioch  in  A.D.  361  ;  and  the  Macedonians,  who  pro- 
fessed to  receive  the  faith  of  Nica^a,  but  were  heretical 
as  to  the  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  had  not 
been  defined  in  that  Creed,  and  who  numbered  thirty- 
six  Bishops  in  Asia. 

The  legislation  of  Theodosius  in  Ecclesiastical 
matters  exceeded  legitimate  limits.  It  was  reasonable 
and  just  that  the  Catholics  should  be  restored  to  the 
Churches  from  which  they  had   been  ejected  under 


3i8    Wai'fiings  from  history  of  the  Priscillianists  agai?!st 

appeals  from  the  Spiritualty  to  the  Secular  Power. 
Constantius,  Julian,  and  Valens.  But  the  disabilities 
and  penalties  imposed  by  him  on  non-Catholics  could 
not  be  justified.  The  evil  consequences  of  an  appeal 
from  the  spiritualty  to  the  secular  power,  for  coercive 
measures  against  heretics,  were  displayed  in  a  striking 
manner  at  this  time  in  the  West,  in  the  treatment  of 
the  Priscillianists  by  the  Spiritualty  and  Temporalty. 

The  Priscillianists — so  called  from  Priscillian,  a 
patrician  of  Spain — propagated  erroneous  opinions, 
derived  partly  from  Manichaeism,^  and  partly  from 
Gnosticism.^  They  asserted  the  principle  of  Dualism,^ 
and  the  evil  of  Matter ;  and  condemned  Marriage, 
and  instituted  Fasts  of  their  own,  and  refused  to 
consume  the  Eucharistic  Elements,  and  separated 
themselves  from  the  Church.  And  like  other  Gnostics, 
who  made  a  show  of  asceticism,  and  vilified  the  human 
body,  they  opened  the  door  to  Antinomian  licentious- 
ness in  practice,  and  dissoluteness  of  life.^ 

They  were  condemned  by  the  Council  of  Saragossa 
in  A.D.  381.''  But  unhappily  some  Bishops  of  the 
Spanish  Church  were  not  content  with  this  spiritual 
sentence.  They  appealed  to  the  Secular  Arm,  first 
to  the  Emperor  Gratian,  and  afterwards  to  the  usurper 
Maximus  at  Treves,  who,  notwithstanding  the  remon- 
strances of  S.  Martin,  the  saintly  Bishop  of  Tours, 
condemned  Priscillian  and  five  of  his  adherents  to 
death.     These  extreme   measures,  strongly  censured 

9  On  which,  see  above,  vol.  i.  198,  372. 

1  On  which,  see  above,  vol.  i.  pp.  180—187,  213,221. 

2  On  which,  see  above,  vol.  i.  p.  202.  There  is  little  force  in  the 
allegations  of  Gibbon  (chap,  xxv.),  following  Lardner  (Credibility, 
chap,  cvii.),  that  the  statements  of  Augustine  and  others  (see  Tillemont, 
viii.  495  —  502)  must  be  false,  because  Priscillian  professed  asceticism. 
Hyper- Asceticism  and  Antinomianism  are  often  near  neighbours. 

3  Sulpic.  Sever.  Hist.  lib.  ii.  c.  46 — 51. 

*  Concil.  General,  ii.  p.  1009.     Bruns,  Concil.  ii.  13. 


Preparations  for  the  Council  of  Constantinople.       3 1 9 

by  S.  Ambrose  (Epist.  24  and  26,  de  Offic.  ii.  21), 
produced  a  reaction  in  favour  of  Priscillian  and  his 
friends,  who  were  regarded  by  some  as  Martyrs,^ 
and  they  gave  an  impetus  to  their  heresy. 

But  to  return  to  the  East.  The  summons  issued 
by  Theodosius  to  the  Bishops  for  the  Council  of  Con- 
stantinople, announced  that  the  purpose  of  its  convo- 
cation was  to  confirm  the  faith  of  Nicaea,  and  to  calm 
the  troubles  of  the  Church.^ 

One  hundred  and  fifty  Bishops  obeyed  the  Em- 
peror's call.  They  came  from  all  parts  of  the  East  but 
Egypt.  None  were  convened  from  the  West ;  nor 
did  Damasus,  Bishop  of  Rome,  who  advised  the  con- 
vention, send  any  legates  to  the  Synod.  The  troubles 
which  were  to  be  tranquillized  affected  two  Eastern 
Churches  only  :  the  succession  to  the  See  of  Constan- 
tinople was  to  be  settled,  and  the  schism  at  Antioch 
was  to  be  healed. 

As  to  the  two  questions  of  doctrine  which  needed 
deliberation,  one  of  them,  namely  the  heresy  of  Apol- 
linarius,  had  been  already  condemned  by  Damasus  in 
a  Council  at  Rome,^  in  the  following  terms  : — "  If 
any  one  says  that  the  Virgin  Mary  is  not  Mother  of 
God,  he  has  no  part  in  the  deity.  If  any  one  says  that 
a  Man  was  first  made,  and  that  afterwards  the  Son  of 
God  assumed  that  Man's  person,  he  is  to  be  condemned. 
If  any  one   invents  two  Sons,  one  of  God  the  Father, 

5  Sulpicius  Severus,  Hist.  ii.  51,  says, "  Priscilliano  occiso,  non  solum 
non  repressa  est  hseresis,  sed  confirmata  latius  progressa  est  ;  nanique 
sectatores  ejus,  qui  eum  prius  ut  sanctum  honoraverant,  postea  ut 
martyrem  colere  coeperunt."  A  summary  of  the  history  may  be  seen 
in  Fleury,  iii.  384—390,  470—473.  Tillemont,  viii.  491—527.  Cp. 
Gibbon,  chap,  xxvii.  pp.  33 — 37. 

*  Socr,  V.  8.     Sozom.  vii.  7. 

7  A.D.373.  Concil.  General,  ii.  896.  It  had  also  been  refuted  by 
Athanasius  ;  see  above,  p.  213. 


320  Apollina7'ian  heresy :  already  cojidernned  hy  Damasus^ 

and  the  Coimcil  of  Rome. 
the  second  of  the  Mother  of  Christ,  he  forfeits  the 
adoption  promised  to  the  faithful.  If  any  one  does 
not  adore  the  Crucified,  let  him  be  placed  among  those 
who  would  destroy  God.  If  any  one  says  that  the 
flesh  of  Christ  has  now  been  laid  aside,  and  that  His 
Godhead  is  now  without  a  human  body,  and  that  He 
will  not  come  again  with  that  body,  let  him  not  see 
the  glory  of  the  Second  Advent.  If  any  one  says 
that  Christ's  flesh  came  from  heaven,  and  was  not 
assumed  by  Him  from  us,  let  him  be  anathema.  If 
any  one  places  his  hope  in  a  Man  who  is  without  a 
reasonable  soid^  he  is  himself  unreasonable,  and  not 
worthy  to  be  saved  wholly"  (i.e.  in  soul  as  well  as 
body) . 

Damasus  also  addressed  a  synodical  letter  to 
PauUinus,  Bishop  of  Antioch,^  in  which,  referring  to 
the  Apollinarians,  he  said,  "  We  anathematize  those 
who  assert  that  the  Logos,  or  Word,  was  instead  of  a 
reasonable  soul  in  the  human  body  of  Christ.  For 
the  Very  Word  of  God  was  not  in  the  place  of  a 
reasonable  and  intellectual  soul  in  Christ  ;  but  the 
Eternal  Word  assumed  a  human  soul — that  is,  a 
reasonable  and  intellectual  soul — and  has  retained 
it  in  union  with  Himself.  If  any  one  says  that  the 
Word  of  God  suffered  in  His  Godhead  and  not  in  His 


8  The  case  of  the  Apollinarians. 

9  Theodoret,  v.  ii.  The  editors  of  the  Concilia  Generalia,  Labbe 
and  Cossart  (torn.  ii.  904),  are  angry  with  Theodoret  because  he  calls 
Paullinus  Bishop  of  Thessalonica,  which  was  then  presided  over  by 
Ascholius.  But  the  fact  is,  Theodoret  does  not  describe  him  as  such, 
but  says  that  he  was  then  at  Thessalonica  (see  the  title  of  that  chapter 
in  Schulze's  edition,  p.  1036);  he  well  knew  that  Paullinus  was  Bishop 
of  Antioch,  and  that  Ascholius  held  the  See  of  Thessalonica.  See 
Theodoret,  v.  9,  where  Ascholius  is  mentioned  among  the  Western 
Bishops  at  Rome. 


On  the  Apollinarian  and  Macedonian  heresies.       321 

flesh  and  reasonable  soul,  which  He  took  in  the  form  of 
a  servant  as  the  Scriptures  teach,  let  him  be  anathema. 
If  any  one  does  not  confess  that  the  Word  of  God 
suffered  in  the  flesh,  and  died,  and  became  the  first- 
begotten  from  the  dead,  being  the  Life,  and  Author 
of  Life,  as  God,  let  him  be  anathema." 

Thus,  previously  to  the  Council  of  Constantinople, 
the  Roman  Church  had  condemned  Apollinarianism, 
which  virtually  destroyed  the  value  of  the  Incarnation 
to  human  nature  as  a  whole^  inasmuch  as  it  excluded 
the  sold  of  man  from  participating  in  the  benefit  of 
that  Incarnation,  and  consequently  from  the  bless- 
ings of  Redemption  and  Sanctification,  and  eternal 
Glory.^ 

After  such  declarations  as  these  from  the  Bishop 
and  Council  of  Rome  on  the  Apollinarian  heresy, 
there  was  no  need  for  Western  Bishops  to  undertake 
a  long  journey  to  the  East  on  that  account. 

The  same  may  be  said  with  regard  to  the  other 
heresy  which  claimed  the  Council's  attention,  the 
Macedonian  heresy,  which  denied  the  Godhead  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  That  also  had  been  condemned  by 
Damasus.  In  the  same  Epistle  to  Paullinus  he  says,^ 
"  Whosoever  does  not  confess  that  the  Holy  Spirit 
proceedeth  from  the  Father,  and  is  verily  and  properly 
of  the  divine  substance,  as  the  Son  and  Word  of  God 
is.  Who  is  God  of  God  ;  and  whosoever  does  not 
confess  that  there    is  One  Godhead  of  the  Father, 


1  The  character  of  ApoHinarianism,  and  its  dangerous  consequences  to 
the  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation  and  the  whole  scheme  of  Redemption, 
are  well  pointed  out  by  Dr.  J.  A.  Dorner  on  the  Person  of  Christ, 
Division  i.  vol.  ii.  pp.  393,  398,  English  Translation. 

2  Theodoret,  v.  11.  It  had  also  been  refuted  by  S.  Basil  in  his 
treatise  "  de  Spiritu  Sancto." 

VOL.  II.  Y 


32  2       Interview  of  the  Bishops  ivith  Theodosius,  who 

recogfiizes  Meletiiis. 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  ;  and  that  there  are  three 
real  Persons  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost, 
Eternal,  Almighty,  creating  all  things,  and  preserving 
all  things  ;  and  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  to  be  wor- 
shipped by  all  creatures,  as  the  Father  is,  and  the 
Son  is  ;  and  whoever  holds  the  true  faith  as  to  the 
Father  and  the  Son,  but  does  not  hold  the  true  faith 
as  to  the  Holy  Spirit,^  let  him  be  anathema.  The 
salvation  of  Christians  rests  on  this  foundation,  to 
believe  in  the  Trinity,  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the 
Holy  Ghost ;  and  to  be  baptized  into  the  One  God- 
head, and  to  believe  in  it/' 

These  declarations  of  Damasus  smoothed  the  way 
for  the  Bishops  of  the  Council  at  Constantinople,  so 
far  as  the  two  dogmatic  questions  were  concerned, 
which  they  had  to  settle  synodically. 

It  was  fortunate  also  that  the  Pope's  epistle  had 
been  addressed  to  Paullinus  of  Antioch,  because  he 
was  the  Bishop  of  the  Catholic  party  separated  from 
that  of  Meletius,  which  was  also  sound  in  the  faith  ; 
and  after  this  Roman  rescript  the  two  parties,  whose 
differences  were  personal  rather  than  of  principle, 
were  more  likely  to  coalesce  in  the  same  profession 
of  the  truth. 

Before  the  opening  of  the  Council,  the  Bishops 
proceeded  to  the  Palace  of  the  Emperor.*  Theodosius 
requested  that  Meletius  might  not  be  pointed  out  to 
him,  but  he  recognized  him  at  once  as  the  venerable 
Bishop  of  Antioch  who  on  the  day  before  his  advance- 
ment to  the  dignity  of  Augustus  had  appeared  to  him 
in  a  dream,  and  had  invested  him  with  the  imperial 
purple,  and  had  placed  the  royal  diadem  on  his  head. 
*' He  embraced  him,"  says  the  historian,  "as  a  son 

3  The  case  of  the  Macedonians.  ■*  Theodorel ,  v.  6  and  7. 


TJie  Council  of  Consta?itinopk — its  character^  and     323 
members. 
saluting  his  father,  and  kissed  his  eyes,  his  mouth, 
his  breast,  and  his  hands." 

The  Council  of  Constantinople  differed  in  some 
respects  from  other  great  Councils  of  the  Church. 

Like  the  Council  of  Nicaea,and  like  other  great  Coun- 
cils, it  was  indeed  convened  by  the  Emperor.  The 
Council  of  Nicaeahad  not  only  been  summoned  by  Con- 
stantine,  but  had  been  opened  by  him,  and  he  had 
taken  part  in  its  deliberations.  But  Theodosius  does 
not  appear  to  have  ever  been  present  at  the  sessions 
of  the  Council  of  Constantinople  ;  much  less  did  he 
attempt  to  control  the  Synod  by  any  personal  direc- 
tion, or  by  means  of  civil  or  military  officers,  as  had 
been  done  by  the  Emperor  Constantius  in  the  Synods 
convened  by  him.  The  Council  of  Constantinople 
was  one  of  the  most  free  and  purely  spiritual  as- 
semblies that  ever  met  in  Christendom. 

In  the  absence  of  the  Bishops  of  Rome  and  Alex- 
andria, Meletius,  the  venerable  Bishop  of  Antioch, 
presided  by  right  at  the  Synod.^  It  numbered  among 
its  150  members,  two  brothers  of  S.  Basil,  Gregory 
Bishop  of  Nyssa,  and  Peter  Bishop  of  Sebaste  ;  Hel- 
ladius,  the  successor  of  S.  Basil  ;  Amphilochius,  his 
intimate  friend  ;  Cyril,  the  venerable  Bishop  of  Jeru- 
salem ;  his  nephew  Gelasius,  of  Caesarea  in  Palestine  ; 
and  many  other  Bishops  who  had  been  Confessors  of 
the  faith. 

The  heterodox  Bishops,  called  Macedonians  or 
Semi-Arians,  being  thirty  in  number,  principally  from 
the  neighbourhood  of  the  Hellespont,  were  also 
summoned  to  the  Council,  in  the  hope  that,  as  they 
accepted  the  doctrine  of  the  Godhead  of  the  Son  as 

5  Greg.  Naz.   Carm.   xi.    1515— 1520,  where  he  draws  a  beautiful 
picture  of  that  holy  man. 

Y   2 


324  Its  Sy nodical  acts :  ordination  of  Maxinms  annulled: 

Gregory  recogjiized. 
well  as  of  the  Father,  and  had  assented  to  an  orthodox 
formula  proposed  by  Liberius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  they 
might  be  won  over  to  perfect    agreement  with  the 
Catholics. 

The  first  business  to  be  transacted  by  the  Council 
was  to  provide  a  Bishop  for  Constantinople. 

This  was  done  by  a  Synodical  act,  affirming  that 
the  election  and  consecration  of  Maximus  the  Cynic 
was  null  and  void.^ 

Gregory  Nazianzen  was  then  declared  to  be  Bishop 
of  Constantinople  by  the  suffrages  of  the  Synod."^ 
Gregory  himself  says  that  he  was  very  unwilling  ^  to 
be  placed  in  that  see  on  all  accounts  but  one, 
namely,  the  hope  which  he  entertained  that  he  might 
be  able  to  heal  the  difference  between  the  Eastern 
and  Western  Churches  as  to  the  Episcopate  of 
Antioch,  and  to  act  as  a  "choragus  between  the 
two  choirs,  so  that  they  might  sing  together  in 
harmony." 

The  affairs  of  Constantinople  having  been  thus 
quietly  settled,  the  next  thing  was  to  provide  for  the 
pacification  of  the  Church  of  Antioch. 

It  had  been  agreed  between  Meletius  and  Paullinus, 
that  in  the  event  of  the  death  of  Meletius,  no  new 
Bishop  should  be  elected  ;  but  that  Paullinus^  (who  had 
been  made  Bishop  of  Antioch  by  Western  influence) 
should  succeed  quietly  to  the  see  ;  and  the  princi- 
pal priests  of  Antioch — Flavian  among  them — had 
assented  to  this  compact,  which  needed  only  to  be 
ratified  by  the  Council.     But  at  this  juncture,  to  the 

^  Canon  4.  7  Greg.  Carm.  xi.  1525 — 1545. 

8  )8ocDi'  KoX  <TT€vcav,  Cann.  xi.  1526 — 1539. 

^  Socr.  V.  5.  Sozom.  viii.  3.  Theodoret  (v.  4)  states  that  when 
Meletius  proposed  this  compact,  Paullinus  dissented.  But  the  other 
account  seems  most  probable.     See  De  Broglie,  v.  425. 


Death  of  Meletius.  Debate  07i  succession  to  his  see :  325 
Gregory's  advice. 
deep  sorrow  of  the  Emperor  and  of  the  Bishops,  who 
admired,  revered,  and  loved  him,  Meletius  died.  His 
funeral  oration  was  pronounced  by  Gregory  of  Nyssa, 
brother  of  S.  Basil,^  who  says  that  their  "■  Elijah  had 
been  taken  away  from  them,  and  that  there  was  no 
Elisha  to  take  his  place."  Meletius  was  buried  with 
almost  royal  honours  at  Antioch.^ 

Gregory  Nazianzen  succeeded  him  as  President  of 
the  Synod.  The  schism  at  Antioch  seemed  now  about 
to  be  healed ;  and  it  might  have  been  hoped  that 
both  parties  would  unite  cheerfully  under  the  Epis- 
copal rule  of  the  survivor  of  the  two  Catholic  Bishops, 
Paullinus. 

But  many  of  the  Eastern  Bishops  were  prejudiced 
against  Paullinus  as  a  nominee  of  the  Western  Church, 
and  proposed  to  elect  a  successor  to  Meletius.  Gregory 
wisely  and  firmly  protested  against  such  a  proceed- 
ing,^ which  was  contrary  to  the  expressed  wishes  of 
Meletius  himself,  and  was  a  contravention  of  an 
amicable  compact,  and  an  abandonment  of  the 
means  of  union,  and  would  be  a  continuation  of  the 
long-protracted  schism. 

He  exhorted  the  Eastern  Bishops  to  yield  to  the 
Western  for  the  sake  of  peace,  and  not  to  contend  for 
their  own  private  opinions  and  wishes.  "Let  us  be 
content  to  suffer  a  little  defeat,"  he  said,*  "  in  order 
that  we  may  gain  a  great  victory ;  namely,  to  be 
saved  for  God,  and  to  save  the  world,  which  is  now 
miserably  perishing.    All  victories  are  not  glorious." 

*  And  is  extant  in  his  works,  iii.  587,  ed.  Paris.  1638. 

2  Greg.  Naz.  Carm.  xi.  1574— 1583,  p.  759. 

3  In  his  autobiographical  Poem  (Carm.  xi.  1591 — 1679)  he  gives  afull 
report  of  his  speech  on  the  occasion ;  it  was  characterized  by  sound 
wisdom,  practical  good  sense,  fervent  piety  and  charity. 

4  Ibid.  1654. 


326  "  The  younger  Bishops'' — their  opposition  to  Gregory  : 
Election  of  Flavian  for  Antioch. 

But  his  expostulations  were  unavailing.  The  Eastern 
Episcopate  had  suffered  a  partial  demoralization  in 
the  evil  days  of  Constantius  and  Valens.  Many  un- 
learned and  time-serving  persons  of  low  origin,,  and 
vulgar  and  sordid  minds,  had  aspired  to  the  Epis- 
copal office,  from  worldly  motives,  to  escape  military 
service,  and  to  enjoy  immunities  from  taxation,  and 
for  the  sake  of  secular  emoluments.  Arianizing 
Bishops  had  been  intruded  into  many  Episcopal  sees  ; 
and  forthesake  of  retaining  their  position  they  had  con- 
formed to  the  orthodox  Creed  under  Theodosius.  These 
were  the  persons  whom  Gregory  calls  the  "  younger 
Bishops,"^  and  who  rejected  his  counsel  and  that  of 
their  elder  brethren  ;  and  whose  passionate  ebullitions 
at  the  close  of  his  speech  are  described  by  him  with 
sensitive  irritability.^ 

Eventually  Flavian  was  elected  by  the  Easterns  to 
be  Bishop  of  Antioch. 

The  original  mischief  of  the  injudicious  policy  of 
Lucifer  of  Cagliari,  who  had  rashly  consecrated 
Paullinus  in  opposition  to  Meletius  (against  the  wiser 
counsel  of  Athanasius  and  Eusebius  of  Vercellse^), 
became  now  more  apparent  by  its  disastrous  con- 
sequences, and  it  recoiled  on  Paullinus  himself. 

But  the  election  of  a  second  Bishop  to  the  see  of 
Antioch  was  not  the  only  misfortune.  Gregory's  own 
appointment  to  the  Archiepiscopal  throne  of  Constan- 
tinople was  next  called  in  question. 

5  Greg.  Naz.  Carm.  xi.  v.  1620. 

^  Ibid.  V.  1680  ;  cp.  xii.  92.  His  strictures  on  contemporary  Bishops 
in  his  two  other  poems,  Carm.  xii.  pp.  778 — 823  (see  especially 
pp.  787  and  797),  and  Carm.  xvii.pp.  849 — 854, "  on  false  Bishops,"  refer 
specially  to  such  prelates  as  these. 

'   See  above,  p.  32  ;  Theodoret,  iii.  2  ;  Socr.  iii.  9;  Sozom.  v.  13. 


Allegations  against  Gregory— His  defence.  327 

He  had   provoked  many  of  the    Easterns    by  his 
bold  rebuke  of  them  for  their  unfairness  to  Paullinus, 
and  for   their    disregard   of  peace.     Other   Bishops, 
devoted  to  the  interests  of  the  West,  now  arrived  at 
Constantinople.     They  were  headed  by   Timotheus, 
who  had  just  succeeded  his  brother  Peter  in  the  See 
of  Alexandria,    and  who  brought    with    him   many 
Egyptian    Bishops,    and   was   soon  joined   by  some 
from  Macedonia,  who  seem  to  have  been  actuated  by 
feelings  of   personal    animosity,  envy,   and  jealousy 
against  Gregory,^  and  who  remonstrated  against  the 
action  of  the  Easterns  in  raising  Gregory  to  the  See 
of  Constantinople.     They   alleged  that  this  appoint- 
ment was  contrary  to  the  Canons  of  the  Church,  espe- 
cially to  the   15th  Canon   of  Nicaea,  which   forbade 
translations  of  Bishops,^  and  which  therefore  had  pro- 
hibited such  an  act  as  the   election  of  Gregory,  who 
was  already  a  Bishop  of  another  see,  either  Nazianzus 
or  Sasima. 

It  was  vain  to  urge  that  Gregory  had  never  been 
Bishop  of  Nazianzus ;  and,  though  he  had  been  re- 
luctantly placed  by  Basil  at  Sasima,  he  had  long  since 
quitted  it  ;  and  that  translations  of  Bishops  were  not 
without  precedent,^  not  only  among  the  Arians,  by 
whom  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  and  Demophilus  of 
Beroea,  had  been  translated  to  the  See  of  Constanti- 
nople itself,  but  even  among  Catholics,  as  in  the 
cases  of  the  two  greatest  Bishops  of  Antioch,  Eusta- 
thius  and  Meletius,  who  had  been  translated  from 
other  sees  ;  and  that  the  Canon  of  Nicaea,  being  only 


^  Greg.  Naz.  Carm.  xi.  1804 — 1815. 
5  Cp.  Concil.  Antioch.  c.  2;  Concil.  Sardic.  c.  I,  2. 
1  Gregory  (ibid.  v.  iSio)  says  that  his  enemies  assailed  him  by  means 
of  obsolete  laws  [y6\iQL  irdXai  TeOvT]K6r(s). 


328        Gregory  resigns  hts  see.     His  farewell  oration. 

a  Canon  on  discipline,  and  not  on  doctrine,  could 
be  altered  by  another  Council  like  that  of  Constanti- 
nople. Gregory,  whose  susceptible  temperament  was 
as  little  qualified  to  endure  provocation  as  it  was  to 
allay  it,  and  who  was  heartily  tired  of  controversy, 
especially  concerning  himself,  and  eagerly  longed  for 
peace,  at  first  withdrew  from  the  sessions  of  the 
Council  ;  and  at  length,  when  he  found  that  the 
storm  had  not  blown  over,  resolved  to  be  the  "  Jonah 
to  calm  it,"  ^  by  casting  himself  out  of  the  ship.  He 
therefore  tendered  his  resignation  of  the  see  first  to 
the  Council,  and  next  to  the  Emperor,  whom  he 
earnestly  entreated  to  relieve  him  of  a  burden  which 
pressed  too  heavily  upon  him,  and  to  restore  peace 
to  the  Church  by  allowing  him  to  retire  from  his  see. 
Theodosius,  with  some  reluctance,  accepted  the 
proffered  resignation.* 

Rejoicing  at  his  own  emancipation  from  the  cares 
of  office,  and  at  his  relief  from  the  weight  of  its 
responsibilities,  he  closed  his  career  at  Constantinople 
with  a  public  farewell  Address  in  the  principal  Church 
of  the  city. 

If  we  may  be  allowed  the  expression,  he  had  a 
glorious  sunset.  In  the  modern  language  of  Greece, 
the  Sun  is  said  fiaatXevecv,'^  i.  e.  lo  reign  as  a  king, 
not  when  it  blazes  in  the  zenith,  but  when  it  sinks  in 
the  west.  Never  did  that  great  Christian  Preacher, 
Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  reign  more  gloriously  than  in 
the  golden  hues  and  magnificent  splendour  of  that 


2  Greg.  Naz.  Carm.  xi.  1828— 1855. 

a      ^\^,A        -.QQ^  -.^r^. 


3  Ibid.  1880 — 1904. 

*  Paai\€V6i  6  t/jAios,  the  sun  is  setting — a  remarkable  expression,  due 
to  the  beauty  of  the  climate,  and  temperament  of  the  inhabitants,  of 
Greece. 


Gregory' s  farewell  address  in  S.  Sophia.  329 

oratorical  sunset,^  when,  in  the  presence  of  150 
Bishops  assembled  in  the  Church  of  S.  Sophia  in  the 
month  of  June,  381,  he  poured  forth  a  flood  of  rich 
and  luminous  eloquence,  in  which  he  described  the 
fruits  of  his  Episcopate  in  awakening  the  true  faith 
and  worship  at  Constantinople  after  a  sleep  of  forty 
years  ;  and  in  which  he  addressed  a  pathetic  adieu 
to  persons  and  things  most  dear  to  him — the  Clergy, 
the  Choir,  the  people,  young  and  old,  men  and 
women,  the  sick  and  needy,  widows,  orphans,  and 
virgins,  his  own  Episcopal  throne,  the  great  Cathe- 
dral Church,  the  still  more  beloved  Chapel  of  Anasta- 
sia ;  ^  to  the  Emperor,  the  Palace,  the  Courtiers,  the 
City  of  Constantinople,  the  East  and  the  West,  and 
the  Angels  and  Divine  Presence  dwelling  in  that 
Church ;  and  in  which  he  invoked  the  benediction  of 
the  Blessed  Trinity  upon  it. 

Gregory  made  his  will  before  "^  he  left  Constanti- 


*  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xlii.  p.  745.  This  Address  stirred  the  heart  of 
Gibbon  himself  (ch.  xxvii.  p.  29),  who  says,  "The  peroration  in  which 
he  takes  a  solemn  leave  of  men  and  angels,  the  city  and  the  emperor, 
the  East  and  the  "West,  is  pathetic  and  almost  sublime." 

6  The  valedictory  words  of  Gregory  to  his  beloved  Anastasia,  to  the 
Church  of  S.  Sophia,  and  to  other  Churches  of  the  city,  and  to  his  own 
Episcopal  See,  and  to  his  Clergy  and  Flock,  and  to  the  City  and  People 
of  Constantinople,  were  probably  in  the  mind  of  Bishop  Ridley,  when, 
on  the  eve  of  his  Martyrdom  at  Oxford  (Oct.  16,  1555),  he  wrote  his 
farewell  to  the  University  of  Cambridge,  his  own  "  loving  mother  and 
nurse,"  and  to  his  "own  dear  College,"  Pembroke  Hall,  in  whose 
orchard  he  had  learnt  by  heart  all  St.  Paul's  Epistles  and  the  Canonical 
Epistles,  and  to  his  own  former  Parish  of  Heme,  in  East  Kent,  and  to 
the  Cathedral  Churches  of  Canterbury,  Rochester,  and  London,  and  to 
the  Clergy  and  People  of  those  cities,  and  to  the  "  Higher  House  of 
Parhament."  Foxe's  Book  of  Martyrs,  p.  1606.  Ridley,  Life  of  Ridley, 
book  viii.  pp.  631,  636,  Lond.  1 763. 

''  If  the  document  given  as  such  by  the  Benedictine  Editors,  ii.  201, 
is  genuine. 


330  His  reth-ement — Electmi  of  Nedarius^ 

nople.  He  departed  from  it  with  a  metrical  prayer,^ 
as  he  had  entered  it  :  ®  "  May  the  Trinity  be  preached 
there,  and  may  some  other  person  who  is  worthy, 
perfect  the  preaching  of  it.  I  will  yield  to  him  the 
throne,  but  will  never  cease  speaking  to  God."  He 
then  retired  first  to  Nazianzus,  and  then  to  Arianzus, 
and  died  A.D.  389.  One  of  his  greatest  orations  was 
spoken  soon  after  his  retirement — his  panegyric  on 
his  friend  Basil  at  Caesarea  ; '  and  thus  Gregory 
Nazianzen  disappears  in  company  with  the  beloved 
comrade  of  his  youth,  his  manhood,  and  old  age. 
"  They  were  lovely  and  pleasant  in  their  lives,  and  in 
their  deaths  they  were  not  divided."  ^ 

Gregory  was  deeply  regretted  after  his  departure 
even  by  some  of  those  who  had  caused  it ;  ^  and  who, 
when  he  had  vacated  his  Episcopal  throne,  were  much 
distressed  to  see  it  filled  by  any  other  occupant. 

At  length  he  was  succeeded  in  the  See  of  Con- 
stantinople by  a  very  different  person,  Nectarius.  He 
was  of  a  noble  family  in  Tarsus,  and  had  served  in 
high  civil  offices  with  credit,  and  was  venerable  for 
his  age  and  gravity  of  manner.  But  he  was  neither 
a  priest  nor  deacon,  and  for  reasons  like  those  which 
had  weighed  with  Constantine  and  Constantius,  he 
had  delayed  his  baptism,  and  as  yet  was  unbaptized. 
Theodosius  had  ordered  the  Bishops  to  submit  to 
him  the  names  of  those  whom  they  deemed  fit  to  fill 
the   vacant   See   of    Constantinople.      One    of    the 


s  Carm.  iv.  p.  669.  ^  See  above,  p.  301. 

1  Orat.  xliii.  p.  769.  It  is  supposed  by  the  Benedictine  Editors  to 
have  been  preached  by  Gregory  in  the  autumn  of  A.D.  381,  in  the 
Cathedral  Church  of  Caesarea,  famous  for  Basil's  brave  conduct  towards 
the  Emperor  Valens,  which  is  described  in  this  oration. 

2  2  Sam.  i.  23.  3  Greg.  Naz.  Carm.  xi.  v.  1905—191-8. 


Acts  of  the  Council — Secession  of  the  Macedonians.     331 

Bishops,  the  recently-appointed  Bishop  of  Antioch," 
Flavian,  in  framing  his  own  list,  added  the  name  of 
Nectarius,  little  dreaming  that  he  would  be  chosen. 
However,  Theodosius  selected  him  ;  the  people  ap- 
proved the  choice ;  and  eventually  the  Council 
approved  it.  Perhaps  the  example  of  S.  Ambrose, 
raised  by  Valentinian  and  the  people  of  Milan  in  a 
similar  manner  from  a  civil  office  to  the  Episco- 
pate, may  have  been  pleaded  as  a  precedent ;  and  the 
Emperor  may  probably  have  been  cognizant  of  some 
qualifications  in  Nectarius,  which  many  afterwards 
admired  in  him.^ 

On  the  death  of  Meletius,  Gregory  had  presided 
in  the  Council.  After  Gregory's  resignation,  Timo- 
theus  of  Alexandria,  and  lastly  Nectarius  held  that 
honourable  position. 

The  great  work  of  the  Council  now  remained  to  be 
done ;  to  declare  the  true  doctrine  of  the  Church 
against  the  ApoUinarian  heresy,  denying  our  Lord^s 
perfect  Manhood,  and  affirming  that  He  had  a  human 
body  without  a  reasonable  soul  ;  and  against  the 
Macedonian  heresy,  denying  the  Godhead  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  Theodosius  had  summoned  the  Macedonian 
Bishops  in  hopes  that  they  might  be  induced  to  re- 
nounce their  heresy  and  to  acknowledge  the  divinity  of 
the  Holy  Ghost ;  but  they  declined  to  do  so,  and 
thirty-six  in  number  quitted  the  Council.^  Their  seces- 

*  The  perplexity  produced  in  the  West  by  the  consecration  first  of 
Maximus  (who  had  many  friends  there),  next  by  the  election  of  Gregory 
himself,  next  by  that  of  Flavian,  next  by  that  of  Nectarius,  is  evident 
from  a  letter  of  S.  Ambrose  to  Theodosius,  Epist.  13,  p.  815,  ed. 
Bened.  It  seems  from  Epist.  14  ibid,  that  these  matters  were  ex- 
plained to  the  Westerns  by  the  Emperor  himself. 

5  Theodoret,v.  8.  Sozom.  vii.  10.  Socr.  v.  8.  Others  have  formed 
a  less  favourable  opinion  of  him.     See  Tillemont,  ix.  488. 

6  Socr.  V.  8.     Sozom.  vii.  7. 


332  Dogmatic  decrees  of  the  Council. 

sion,  however,  much  as  it  was  to  be  regretted  in 
other  respects,  facilitated  the  accompb'shment  of  the 
Synod's  work.  As  has  been  already  said,  the  ground 
had  been  cleared  on  these  two  dogmatic  questions 
by  the  writings  of  Athanasius  and  of  Basil,  and  by 
the  Council  of  Rome  under  Damasus,  and  by  his 
Epistle  to  Paullinus  of  Antioch  ;  and  certain  words 
were  already  at  hand  for  adoption  by  the  Council, 
which  had  been  used  in  dogmatic  treatises  and  cate- 
chetical instructions  in  the  Church  on  these  two^ 
articles  of  the  faith.  The  Council  agreed  without 
a  dissentient  voice,  as  far  as  we  know,  in  the  follow- 
ing determinations : — 

1.  To  confirm  the  faith  of  Niccea  in  precisely  the 
same  words  as  those  in  which  it  was  originally  put 
forth  in  A.D.  325. 

2.  To  add  to  that  Creed  some  words  declaratory 
of  the  doctrine  of  Holy  Scripture  and  the  Church, 
on  the  perfect  Manhood  (in  soul  as  well  as  body)  of 
the  Son  of  God,  in  opposition  to  the  Apollinarian 
heresy. 

3.  To  add  also  to  that  Creed  some  words  declara- 
tory of  the  doctrine  of  Holy  Scripture  and  the 
Church,  on  the  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghosty  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  Macedonian  heresy. 

This  was  done  as  follows  :  ^  the  additions  made  at 
Constantinople  are  printed  in  italics : — 

7  They  had  been  inserted  in  the  Ancoratus  of  S.  Epiphanius,  Bishop 
of  Salamis  in  Cyprus,  c.  121,  which  was  composed  before  A.D.  374. 
See  Petav.  on  Can.  60,  p.  372  ;  and  cp.  Tillemont,  ix.  p.  495.  Nice- 
phorus  Callisti  (Hist.  Eccl.  xii.  13)  ascribes  the  redaction  of  the  Creed 
to  Gregory  Nyssen  ;  and  Marcus  Eugenicus,  in  the  Council  of  Florence 
(A.D.  1439),  to  Gregory  Nazianzen  ;  but  these  have  no  ancient  authority 
in  their  favour.     Cp.  Hefele,  Concilien,  ii.  p.  lo. 

"  Concil.  General,  ii.  p.  952.     For  brevity's  sake,  and  because  the 


Niceno-Constantinopolitan  Creed.  333 

"  We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty, 
Maker  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  of  all  things  visible 
and  invisible  :  and  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the 
only-begotten  Son  of  God,  begotten  of  the  Father 
before  all  worlds  (or  ages),  Light  of  Light,  Very  God 
of  Very  God,  begotten,  not  made,  being  of  one  sub- 
stance with  the  Father,  by  Whom  all  things  were 
made :  Who  for  us  men,  and  for  our  salvation,  came 
down  from  heaven,  and  was  incarnate  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  of  the  Virgm  Mary,  and  was  made  man,  and 
was  crucified  also  for  us  under  Pontius  Pilate ;  He 
suffered  and  was  buried,  and  the  third  day  He  rose 
again  according  to  the  Scriptures,  and  ascended  into 
heaven,  and  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  the  Father : 
and  He  shall  come  again  with  glory  to  judge  both 
the  quick  and  dead  ;  Whose  kingdom  shall  have  no  end? 

And  we  believe  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Lord,^  and 

greater  part  of  the  Creed  promulgated  at  Constantinople  was  a  repro- 
duction of  tlie  Nicene  Creed,  the  whole  often  bears  that  name,  as  it  does 
still  (cp.  Hefele,  Concilien,  ii.  p.  12).  The  theory  of  some  (e.g.  Dean 
Stanley)  that  it  was  lirst  authorized  at  Chalcedon,  A.D.  451,  has  been 
disposed  of  by  Hefele,  ibid.,  and  p.  31.  De  Broglie,  v.  451.  Canon 
Bright  on  the  Canons,  pp.  80,  81. 

9  The  ApoUinarians  are  said  to  have  held  Millenarian  opinions  (Con- 
cil.  General,  ii.  896),  and  this  clause  may  refer  to  them  (see  above, 
vol.  i.  p.  305),  or  to  the  heresy  of  Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  condemned  by 
the  Council  of  Antioch,  a.d.  341. 

1  It  is  to  be  regretted  that,  in  the  Order  for  the  Holy  Communion 
in  the  editions  of  our  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  a  comma  has  not  been 
inserted  (as  in  the  Greek  and  Latin  copies  of  the  Creed)  after  the  word 
Lord  (Kwptoi/).  The  consequence  is,  that  the  purpose  of  the  Conslanti- 
nopolitan  Council,  in  adopting  that  word,  to  declare  that  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  Lord  and  God  (Jehovah),  is  often  ignored  and  frustrated  in 
our  Churches,  and  the  words  are  run  on  and  recited  as  if  they  meant  Lord 
of  life  as  well  as  Giver  of  life.  There  is  scarcely  any  musical  setting  of 
the  Niceno-Constantinopolitan  Creed,  as  far  as  I  am  aware,  which 
marks  emphatically  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  Lord. 

The  editions  of  our  Book  of  Common  Prayer  omit  **  Holy"  before 
"  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  ;"  probably  by  an  oversight. 


334  On  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Giver  of  Life;  Who pj^oceedeth^  from  the  Father,  Who 
with  the  Father  and  the  Son  together  is  worshipped  attd 
glorified,  Who  spake  by  the  Prophets.     And  in  one  Holy 

2  iKiropev6iJ.€ifov.  The  peaceful  reconciliation  of  the  Eastern  andWestern 
Churches  might,  I  think,  be  hoped  for  by  a  careful  distinction  between 
the  two  words  e/cTropeuoyuai  and  procedo.  We  cannot  say  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  i  KiropevcT  ai  {is  sices  forth)  from  the  Son,  2,%  from  a  foimtain  ; 
but  Vv^e  may  say,  and  the  Easterns  cannot  deny,  that  the  Holy  Spirit 
proceeds  fro7n  the  Son  as  well  as  from  the  Father,  inasmuch  as  Holy 
Scripture  testifies  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  Spirit  of  the  Son  (Rom, 
viii.  9;  Gal.  iv.  6;  i  Pet.  i.  ii),  and  receives  and  takes  of  what  is 
Chris fs  (Jolin  xvi.  14,  15),  and  is  sent  by  Himixovc^  the  Father  (John 
XV.  26),  as  well  as  is  sent  by  the  Father  in  the  name  of  the  Son 
(John  xiv.  26).  But,  inasmuch  as  the  Greek  word,  which  the  Greek 
Church  uses  in  the  Niceno-Constantinopolitan  Creed  to  signify  the 
cojiiing  fo7-th  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  e/c7ropeyoyuai,  a  word  of  more  limited 
sense  than  the  Latin  v^oxdprocedo  and  its  derivations,  and  signifying  the 
issuing  forth  as  a  stream  from  a  source  ;  and  inasmuch  as  this  Greek 
word  iKiropevofxai.  is  the  word  used  in  Ifolj/  Scripture,  to  express  the 
issuing-forth  of  the  Holy  Spirit  from  the  Father  (John  xv.  26) ;  and  in- 
asmuch as  the  word  iKnopevofjLai  was  not  used  by  the  ancient  Greek 
Church  concerning  the  Holy  Spirit  in  reference  to  the  So7i,  but  only,  as 
the  Scriptures  speak,  with  reference  to  the  Father  (see  Bishop  Pearson 
on  the  Creed,  Art.  viii.);  and  inasmuch  as  in  the  words  of  S.  Athanasius 
(contra  Sabellianos,  c.  xi.  p.  35,  ed.  Bened.  1777  ;  cp.  Bishop  Bull, 
Defens.  Fid.  Nicasn.  ii.  3,  10,  11,  and  ii.  4,  10),  there  is  but  one 
original  Fountain  of  Deity,  namely,  ijt  the  Father:  therefore  we  cannot 
but  agree  with  the  Greek  Church,  speaking  the  Greek  language,  and 
affirming  that  the  Holy  Spirit  issues  forth  {iKTvopiv^Tai)fro7?i  the  Father, 
as  the  sole  Fountain  of  Deity. 

S.  Gregory  Thaumaturgus  (scholar  of  Origen)  in  his  Creed  describes 
the  Spirit  as  e/c  ttjs  ovaias  tov  -Karphs  di  vtov  di'Stcos  iKir^jxcpQev, 
and  e/c  Qi:Ov  ttju  virap^iv  exov  koi  Si"  viov  irecprji'hs  (see  Greg.  Nyss. 
Vita  Greg.  Thaum.  tom.  iii.  545),  and  S.  Basil  de  Spir.  Sanct.  §  18 
says  that  the  Spirit  5i'  efhs  vlov  t^  4j/1  narpl  (TwaimaQai,  and  that  the 
divine  holiness  and  royal  dignity  e/c  irarphs  dia  tov  inovoyevovs  irvl 
rh  irvevixa  Sl7)k€i.  S.  Gregory  Nazianzen  and  S.  Gregory  Nyssen,  the 
brother  of  S.  Basil,  may  be  supposed  to  represent  the  opinion  of  the 
Council  of  Constantinople.  S.  Gregory  Nazianzen  thus  writes  (Orat.ii. 
p.  30,  ed.  Bened.  Paris,  1778)  :  — "The  Father  would  only  in  an  un- 
worthy manner  be  said  to  be  the  first  p7'i7iciple  (apx^)  unless  He  were 
regarded  as  the  cause  of  that  deity  which  we  contemplate  in  the  Son  and 
in  the  Holy  Ghost :  in  the  former  s  the  Son  and  Word  ;  in  the  latter 
as   a   Forth-coming   and  Indissoluble."     His  testimony  in  Orat.    xl. 


On  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 


135 


Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church.  We  acknowledge  07ie 
Baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins ;  we  look  for  the  Re- 
surrection of  the  dead,  and  tJie  life  of  the  world  to  come, 
Ame?i. 

PP-  379,  380,  is  full  and  precise.  The  following  paragraphs  are  from 
it.  Having  delivered  a  protest  against  Arianism,  as  introducing  the 
heresy  of  three  first  principles  (apxas),  consequently  of  t/iree  Cods,  he 
asks,  "Of  Whom  could  the  Son  be  a  Son,  unless  with  relation  to  the 
Father  as  the  Cause  (of  Sonship)  ?  The  doctrine  of  the  Divine  Unity 
can  only  be  maintained  by  referring  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit  to  one 
Cause  in  the  Father  ,•  not,  however,  by  composition,  or  commixture ; 
for  we  cannot  hold  three  Persons  {hitoaTaani)  unless  we  avoid  all 
notion  of  coalition,  or  solution,  or  confusion.  The  distinct  properties 
(of  the  Persons)  are,  that  of  the  Father,  to  be  the  first  Principle,  and 
Cause,  and  Fountain;  that  of  the  Son,  to  have  been  caused  from  Fteruity, 
and  to  be  the  Cause  of  the  Universe.''''  See  also  Orat.  xxxi.  p.  561, 
where  he  speaks  of  the  isstiing  forth  (iKiropevais)  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
from  the  Father. 

S.  Gregory  Nyssen  thus  speaks  (tom.  ii.  p.  455,  ed.  Paris.  1615)  :— 
**  The  essence  of  the  (Divine)  virtue  of  Omniscience  and  Superinten- 
dence is  one,  in  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  this 
virtue  springs  forth  from  the  Father  as  the  Fountain,  and  energizes  by 
the  Son,  and  consummates  grace  by  the  power  of  the  Spirit,  and  is  not 
separated  by  the  distinct  properties  of  the  three  Persons. "  And,  p.  459, 
"  But  if  any  one  should  take  occasion  to  charge  us  with  making  a  mix- 
ture and  confusion  of  the  Persons,  we  say  that  we  do  not  deny  a 
distinction  between  that  which  is  a  catise,  and  that  which  is  caused  by 
it.  There  is  also  a  distinction  between  that  which  is  caused  immediately 
by  a  cause,  and  that  which  is  caused  mediately  by  it.  The  property  of 
the  Son  is  to  be  immediately  begotten  of  the  Father  ;  but  the  property 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  to  be  from  the  Father— in  such  a  way  that  the 
Son,  Who  is  between  the  two,  does  not  obstruct  the  Holy  Spirit  from 
His  proper  relation  to  the  Father.  But  when  we  speak  of  cause,  and 
of  what  is  caused,  we  do  not  impair  identity  of  essence  thereby." 

And  again,  p.  463  : — "  There  is  virtue  which  exists  without  genera- 
tion, and  which  is  the  cause  of  all  generation.  From  the  Father  the 
Son  is  begotten,  through  Whom  are  all  things.  All  things  were  made 
through  the  Son,  with  Whom  the  Holy  Ghost  is  to  be  contemplated  as 
having  existed  from  Eternity.  No  one  can  behold  the  Son  unless  he  is 
illuminated  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  Since  therefore  the  Holy  Spirit,  from 
Whom  all  ability  and  supply  of  grace  flows  to  the  creature,  depends 
indeed  on  the  Son,  with  Whom  He  is  inseparably  comprehended,  but 
has  His  existence  originated  by,  and,  as  it  were,  hanging  on  to  its  catise 


^^6   The  Ci'eed  of  Constant{7iople :  the  Creed  of  tlie  Church 
Universal  for  \^oo  years. 
This  faith  so  declared  at  Constantinople  in  A.D. 
381,  has  now  sounded  in  the  Universal   Church  for 
1500  years.     It  is  recited  by  the  Eastern  and  Western 


in  the  Father, /r<?w  out  of  Whom  He  issues  forth  (iKiropiverai),  He  has 
this  characteristic  mark  of  the  property  of  His  Person,  that  He  is  known 
together  with  the  Son  and  by  His  help,  and  that  He  has  His  existence 
from  the  Father  ;  and  the  Son  has  also  this  property,  that  through  Him- 
self and  with  Himself  He  makes  known  the  Holy  Spirit,  Who  issues 
forth  from  the  Father.'''  The  Son  is  the  Mediator  (fjieaiTrjs)  through 
Whom  life  flows  eternally  from  the  Father  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  by 
the  Holy  Ghost  to  man  (Epist.  5). 

It  cannot,  I  think,  be  said  that  any  of  these  Fathers  of  the  Church, 
or  any  of  their  contemporaries  in  the  East,  would  have  accepted  the 
statement  that  the  Holy  Ghost  isstees  forth  from  the  Son,  as  well  as  from 
the  Father,  zsfrom  an  original  or  distinct  fountain  of  Deity.  At  the 
same  time  the  Greek  Fathers,  while  maintaining  that  God  the  Father  is 
the  only  original  Fountain  of  Deity,  did  not  hesitate  to  acknowledge 
that  God  the  Son,  as  being  eternally  consubstantial  with  the  Father,  is 
mediately  and  derivatively  a  fountain  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  flows  to  us  eternally  through  God  the  Son,  although  He  does 
not  ^ow  forth  or  out  of  God  the  Son.  Thus  S.  Athanasius  de  Incar- 
natione  et  contra  Arianos,  §  9,  vol.  i.  p.  701,  ed.  1777:  OlSe  irapa  t<5 
6  i^  iraT  pi  OUT  a  rhv  vlhv  tt  7]yi]v  tov  ayiov  iri/^vjxaTos.  §  48  :  Uph 
TTJs  €vavQp(t3Trr](Tiws  A6y  o  s  &v  exopTJ7€t  to7s  ay  i  0  is  rh  irpevfia. 
S.  Cyril  Alex,  sub  Assert.  34  :  'Ek  ttjs  oif  a  ias  rod  iraTpos  koI  tov  vloO 
rh  irv^vna  rb  ayiov.  S.  Epiphan.  Hseres.  62,  p.  5^5  •  '^^^  '''^  Truevfia 
avu  Trarpl  kuI  vtw,  eK  ir  arpbs  i  Kir  o  p  e  v  6  /jl  e  v  ou  /col  tov  viov 
Kafx^dvov,  ix  t  rj  s  aiiTrjs  ova  ias,  e/c  ttJs  outtjs  dedTrjros,  e  k 
TT  ar  po  s  K  al  v  t  0  v,  (Tvv  trarpX  Ka\  vl^  ei/VTroaTaTOw  ael  rb  Trveviua  rh 
ayiop,  TTi/id/jLa  XpicrTov,  Tri/evfxa  irarpos.  The  Greek  Fathers  taught  the 
iKTr6pev(ris  of  the  Spirit  81a  tov  vtov,  but  not  e'/c  tov  vlov.  So  S.  Cyril 
Alex,  de  Adorat.  lib.  i. :  'Ek  iraTphs  Si'  vlov  irpoxf^^fJ^^vov  irucvfia. 
S.  John  Damascen.  de  Fide  Orthodoxa,  i.  c.  xii.  p.  148  :  To  Tri^evfxa  rb 
ayiov,  Trv(viJ.a  tov  iraTphs,  cos  eK  irarphs  iKirop^vo^^vov,  Ka\  vlov  Se  irvevfia, 
ovx  ws  e|  avTov,  a\?C  ws  5i'  avTov  4k  tov  naTphs  eKiropevo- 
ixevov'  (i6vos  yap  atTios  6  iraT^p. 

The  ancient  Latin  Fathers  also  declare  that  the  Son  receives  from  the 
Father  this  very  attribute  and  prerogative,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  proceeds 
from  Him  as  well  as  from  the  Father,  Who  is  the  principal  origin  of 
deity.  S.  Plilary  de  Trin.  lib.  xii.  57,  expresses  this  truth  very  clearly  : 
*'  Conserva  banc  oro  fidei  mere  incontaminatam  religionem,  et  usque  ad 
excessum  spiritus  mei  dona  mihi  banc  conscientice  mens  vocem,  ut  quod 


Canons  of  the  Council  of  Constantinople.  337 

Churches  at  the  administration  of  the  Holy  Com- 
munion, and  by  the  Anglican  Church  at  home 
and  in  her  Colonies  throughout  the  world,  and  in 
the  Church  of  America. 


The  Council  of  Constantinople  made  certain  Canons 
on  the  9th  of  July,  A.D.  381.^ 

They  are  described  in  their  preamble  as  "  Canons 
of  the  150  Fathers  who  came  together  at  Constanti- 
nople ;"  and  in  some  editions  of  them  as  "  decreed  by 
the  Bishops  who  came  together,  by  the  grace  of  God, 
to   Constantinople   from   different   provinces,    being 

in  regenerationis  meae  symbolo,  baptizatus  in  Patre  et  Filio  et  Spiritu 
Sancto,  professus  sum,  semper  obtineam,  Patrem  scilicet  Te  nostrum, 
et  Filium  Tuum  una  Tecum,  adorem  ;  Sanctum  Spiritum  Tuum,  qui 
ex  Te  per  Unigenitum  Tuum  est,  promerear."  S.  Augustine  de  Trinit. 
iv.  20,  **  Totius  dtii2l\s  principium  Pater  est."  Ibid.  \.v.  17,  **Non 
frustra  in  hac  Trinitate  non  dicitur  Verbum  Dei  nisi  Filius,  nee  Donum 
Dei  nisi  Spiritus  Sanctus,  nee  de  quo  genitum  est  Verbum,  et  de  quo 
procedit /rma)>rt/i!'^(?;' Spiritus  Sanctus,  nisi  Deus  Pater."  Cp.  Novatian. 
de  Trinitate,  cap.  xxxi.,  where  he  speaks  of  the  Father  as  the  fountain 
and  first  principle  of  all  essence. 

The  whole  is  well  summed  up  by  S.  Epiphanius,  Ancorat.  §  §  67  and 
72:  Ti)  TTuevfjLa  dvai  Trap*  a[jL(f>OT4p(ov  (toO  irarphs  Kal  rod  vlov) 
ws  itapa  rod  ir  ar  ph  s  iKiropevSfievov,  KOi  €K  rod  vlov  \  afi- 
fidpov.  Cp.  ibid,  de  Hseres.  Ixii.  §  4,  and  Ixix.  §  52;  S.Cyril  Alex.  vi. 
p.  229.  But  what  the  Greeks  reasonably  complain  of  is,  that  the  Latins 
say,  and  would  require  all  to  say,  to  irvevfia  rh  ayiou  ovk  i  k  rov  itarplis 
fidvov,  o\Ad  ye  Kal  4  k  rod  v  t  o  v  iKiropevecrOai,  Kaiuo\oyfj(ravres. 
See  Photii  Epist.  ii.  §  8,  and  Theophylact.  ad  Joann.  c.  iii.  Cp.  Con- 
fessio  Orthodoxa  in  "  Libri  Symbolic!  Ecclesise  Orientalis,"  ed, 
Kimmel,  p.  142. 

Since  this  note  was  written,  two  works  by  two  learned  writers  have 
come  into  my  hands,  one  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Pusey,  the  other  by  the  Rev. 
H.  B.  Swete,  to  which  the  reader  is  referred. 

3  Concil.  General,  ii.  955.  Bp.  Beveridge,  Synodicon,  i.  p.  85. 
Bruns,  Concil.  i.  20.  As  to  the  number  of  the  Canons,  see  Hefele, 
Concil.  ii.  p.  13.  They  appear  to  have  been  only  four  ;  the  other 
ihree,  which  are  sometimes  ascribed  to  this  Council,  belong  rather  to  the 
Constantinopolitan  Synod  of  the  year  382. 

VOL.   II.  Z 


^;^S     Canons  of  Cojistantinople — on  the  dignity  of  its  See. 

convoked  by  the  most  religious  Emperor  Theo- 
dosius." 

Canon  i  declared  the  Nicene  Creed  inviolable,  and 
condemned  some  heresies  by  name — the  Eunomian 
or  Anomoean,  the  Arian  or  Eudoxian,  the  Semi-Arian 
or  Pneiimatomachist,  the  Sabellian,  Marcellian,*  Pho- 
tinian,  and  Apollinarian. 

Canon  2. — "  The  Bishops  who  are  over  a  Diocese '■' 
(the  word  Diocese  is  here  used  for  an  aggregate  of 
Provinces,  each  with  a  Metropolitan  at  its  head,^  and 
their  Chiefs  of  Dioceses  in  this  sense  were  called 
Patriarchs  or  Exarchs)  "may  not  intrude  into  Churches 
which  are  beyond  their  own  limits,^'  and  may  not 
introduce  confusion  into  the  Churches. 

This  Canon  is  then  illustrated  by  examples  of 
Bishops  in  various  Dioceses ;  e.  g.  in  Egypt,  with 
Alexandria  as  its  head ;  in  the  East,  with  Antioch 
as  its  chief  City  and  Church  ;  in  Asia,  in  Pontus,  and 
in  Thrace.  Each  of  these  several  Bishops  is  to  exercise 
jurisdiction  in  his  own  Diocesis  respectively,  and  in 
that  only. 

Canon  3. — "  However,  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople 
shall  have  the  precedence  of  honour,^  next  after  the 
Bishop  of  Rome — because  it  is  "  new  Rome." 

Canon  4. — Against  Maximus  the  Cynic  ;  he  is  not, 
and  never  was,  a  Bishop  ;    and  those  who  were  or- 

■*  Therefore  Gregory  Nyssen's  letter  (Epist.  5,  ed.  Migne,  p.  1030), 
in  which  the  Marcellians  are  mentioned  as  having  been  admitted  to 
communion,  must  have  preceded  the  Council  of  Constantinople. 

*  See  above,  chap.  vii.  p.  241. 

fi  TO  Trpeff/Seta  ttjs  tjjUtjs.  Cardinal  Baronius,  Ann.  A.D.  3S1, 
attempted  to  show  that  this  Canon  is  not  genuine;  but  in  vain.  It  is 
contained  in  all  the  ancient  collections  of  Canons,  and  is  referred  to  by 
Socr.  V.  8,  and  Sozom.vii.  9.  See  Hefele,  p.  17,  who  acknowledges  that 
this  Canon  not  merely  raised  the  dignity,  but  extended  the  jurisdiction 
of  Constantinople ;  e.  g.  over  the  provinces  of  Thrace. 


On  Maxi7mis— on  Appeals— No  Western  Bishop  present.  339 

dained  by  him  have  no  clerical  status.     All  that  has 
been  done  by  him  is  null  and  void. 

Another  Canon  is ''  sometimes  ascribed  to  this 
Council,  sometimes  to  that  which  met  at  Constanti- 
nople in  A.D.  382,  for  regulating  Appeals,  which  are 
first  to  be  made  to  the  Provincial  Council,  and  may 
pass  from  it  to  that  of  the  Diocesis  (or  aggregate  of 
Provinces). 

There  is  no  reference  made  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome, 
nor  to  the  Council  of  Sardica.^ 

The  names  of  147  Bishops,  or  their  delegates,  are 
subscribed  to  the  Creed  and  the  Canons.^ 

At  the  head  of  them  stands  Nectarius,  Bishop  of 
Constantinople,  followed  by  Timothy  of  Alexandria. 
The  names  of  Meletius  of  Alexandria  and  of  Gregory 
Nazianzen  also  appear  in  the  signatures,  as  they  were 
parties  concerned  in  the  earlier  proceedings  of  the 
Council.  No  name  of  any  Western  Bishop  is  among 
the  subscriptions  to  them. 

The  Bishops  of  the  Council  transmitted  these 
Canons  and  the  Creed,  as  put  forth  by  them,  in  a 
Synodical  Epistle  to  the  Emperor  Theodosius,  in 
which  they  give  thanks  to  God  for  the  establishment 
of  his  imperial  power,  for  the  settlement  of  the  peace 
of  the  Churches,  and  for  the  confirmation  of  the  true 
faith  ;  and  they  thus  speak  :  "  Having  been  summoned 
to  Constantinople  by  thy  letters,  we  began  by  renew- 
ing mutual  concord  among  ourselves  ;  and  then  we 
put  forth  certain  short  definitions  by  which  we  con- 


s' Concil.  General,  ii.  948,  949. 

8  Fleury,  iii.  417;  and  Tillemont  says,  ix.  4S9,  "The  Council 
appears  to  reject,  whether  designedly,  or  without  giving  it  a  thought, 
what  had  been  decreed  by  the  Council  of  Sardica  in  favour  of  Rome." 

9  Concil.  General,  ii.  956. 

Z   2 


340    Synodical  Epistle  to  Theodosius — and  to  the  Western 

Bishops. 
firmed  the  faith  of  the  Fathers  at  Nicaea,  and  con- 
demned certain  perverse  heresies  which  had  sprung 
up  against  it ;  and  also  enacted  certain  Canons  for 
the  right  constitution  and  ordering  of  the  state  of  the 
Churches  ;  all  which  we  have  now  appended  to  this 
our  letter ;  and  we  beseech  thy  clemency  that  the 
suffrages  of  the  Synod  may  be  ratified  ;  that,  as  thou 
hast  done  honour  to  the  Church  by  thy  letters  con- 
voking the  Council,  thou  wouldest  now  set  thy  seal  on 
those  things  which  have  been  decreed  by  it.''  They 
end  with  a  loyal  prayer  to  Almighty  God  for  the 
Emperor,  and  for  the  peace  and  prosperity  of  his 
realm. 

In  the  following  summer  (a.d.  382)  many  of  the 
Bishops  returned  to  the  city,  when  they  received  a 
letter  from  Damasus,  inviting  them  to  Rome.  They 
declined  that  invitation  ;  but  they  joined  in  a  Synodi- 
cal Epistle,^  which  they  sent  from  Constantinople 
by  the  hands  of  certain  delegates,  addressed  to  Dama- 
sus, Ambrose,  Ascholius,  and  other  Bishops  assembled 
at  Rome. 

In  this  Epistle  2  they  describe  the  recent  severe 
sufferings  inflicted  on  them  for  the  punishment  of 
their  sins,  and  the  restitution  to  them  of  their 
Churches,  which  had  been  occupied  by  heretics  ;  and 
they  declare  how  the  Church  of  Constantinople  had 
been  delivered  by  God  from  blasphemers,  as  from  the 
mouth  of  a  lion.  They  announce  that  they  have  re- 
ceived and  confirmed  in  their  Synod,  the  one  true 
faith  in  the  One  Godhead,  power,  and  substance,  and 

»  Theodoret,  v.  8,  9. 

2  Written  in  the  name  of  the  "holy  Synod  of  Orthodox  Bishops 
assembled  in  the  great  city  Constantinople  to  their  most  honoured  lords, 
and  most  pious  brethren  and  fellow-ministers,  the  holy  Bishops  gathered 
together  in  the  great  city  Rome." 


Tne  ordination  of  Nectarius ;  a7id  Flavian— Jerusalem    341 

the  "  Mother  of  all  Churches." 
equal  dignity,  and  co-eternal  royalty  of  the  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  in  three  perfect  hypostases^  or 
in  three  perfect  persons ;  and  that  they  have  con- 
demned all  heresies,  such  as  the  Sabellian,  which 
confounds  the  Persons  of  the  Trinity,  and  destroys 
their  distinct  Personality  ;  and  of  the  Eunomians  and 
Arians,  and  of  those  who  war  against  the  Godhead  of 
the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  that  they  have  abolished  the 
blasphemy  of  those  which  divide  the  Substance, 
Nature,  and  Godhead  of  the  Trinity,  and  who  add 
to  the  Uncreated,  Consubstantial,  Co-eternal  Trinity 
some  other  nature,  created,  and  of  a  different  sub- 
stance. 

They  add  that  they  have  ordained  Nectarius  to  be 
Bishop  of  Constantinople  in  their  CEcumenical  Synod 
by  the  common  consent  of  all,  and  in  the  presence  of 
the  Emperor  Theodosius,  and  of  all  the  Clergy  and 
the  City  approving  it. 

They  state  also  that  Flavian  has  been  ordained 
Bishop  of  Antioch  by  Bishops  of  the  Eastern  Province 
and  Diocese  assembled  together,  and  with  the  con- 
sent of  the  Church  ;  and  that  this  consecration  has 
been  approved  by  the  CEcumenical  Synod. 

They  also  declare  that  Cyril,  who  had  been  formerly 
consecrated  canonically  by  Bishops  of  the  Province, 
and  had  contended  with  the  Arians,  is  "  Bishop  of  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem^  the  Mother  of  all  Churches!'  ^ 

Let    us    now    revert    in    conclusion   to    the   work 

3  Observe,  this  title  "Mother  of  all  Churches"  is  given  to  the  Church 
of  Jerusalem  in  this  Synodical  Letter  addressed  to  the  Bishop  oi  Rome, 
which  now  calls  herself  "  the  Mother  and  Mistress  of  all  Churches." 
"  Ecclesia  Romana  omnium  Ecclesiarum  mater  est  etmagistra  "  are  the 
words  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  Concil.  Trident.  Sess.  vii.;  and  again, 
Sess.  xiv.  and  Sess.  xxii,,  and  ot  Pius  IV. 's  Creed. 


342     IV/ty  the  Council  of  Constantinople  is  called  a  General 

Council. 
of  the   Council  of  Constantinople,  the   confirmation 
and  consummation  of  the  Creed  of  Nicaea. 

I.  This  Creed,  so  confirmed  and  consummated, 
has  been  received  and  maintained  in  the  Church 
Universal  for  1500  years. 

The  Council  of  Constantinople,  which  confirmed 
and  completed  that  Creed^  is  called  the  Second 
CEcumenical,  or  General,  Council. 

This  fact  illustrates  the  principle  already  stated,* 
that  the  test  of  (Ecumenicity  is  not  to  be  decided  by 
the  number  of  Bishops  in  a  Council,  nor  by  the 
diversity  and  extent  of  the  countries  from  which  they 
come,  but  by  the  subsequent  reception  of  their  decrees 
by  the  ChiLrch  Universal. 

The  Constantinopolitan  Council  consisted,  as  we 
have  said,  of  Eastern  Bishops  alone ;  no  name  of 
any  Western  Bishop  appears  in  the  subscriptions  to 
it.^  But  this  Creed,  so  promulgated,  is  r^^^^W^by  the 
whole  Church,  Western  as  well  as  Eastern  ;  and  there- 
fore, in  this  respect,  the  Council  of  Constantinople  is 
regarded  by  both  as  an  CEcumenical  Council,  and 
takes  its  place  next  after  the  Council  of  Nicaea,  and  is 
called  the  "  Second  General  Council." 

This  Creed,  which    declares  the  Doctrines  of  the 

"*  So  far  at  least  as  its  Creed  is  concerned  (see  Hefele,  ii.  30 — 33), 
whatever  may  be  thought  of  its  Canons ;  especially  Canon  3,  which  was 
not  received  by  Rome.  But  the  Niceno- Constantinopolitan  Creed  (with 
\h.Q.  filioque,  but  without  the  additions  made  to  it  at  the  Council  of 
Trent  in  the  i6th  century)  is  recited  by  the  Church  of  Rome  at  tlie 
Mass.     It  is  the  baptismal  Creed  of  the  Eastern  Church. 

The  universal  reception  of  the  Constantinopolitan  Creed,  but  not  of 
the  Canons,  is  another  illustration  of  the  proposition  already  stated 
with  regard  to  the  Council  of  Nicaea  (above,  vol.  i.  p.  393),  that  a 
Council  may  be  General  in  some  respects  and  not  in  others. 

*»  The  four  Western  names  in  some  copies  are  spurious.  See  Hefele, 
Concilien,  ii.  5,  note. 


The  Consta7itinopolitaii  Creed — cannot  he  shaken.  343 
Church  life  ;  and  Church  History. 
Christian  Faith  as  revealed  by  Christ  to  His  Apostles, 
and  delivered  by  them  to  the  Church,  and  which  has 
been  preserved  by  God's  providence  for  fifteen  centuries, 
can  now  never  be  shaken.  The  divisions  of  the  Church 
herself — especially  the  separation  of  the  East  from  the 
West — greatly  as  they  are  to  be  deplored,  yet,  under 
the  same  overruling  Providence,  have  this  beneficial 
effect :  no  Christian  Community  now  exists,  or  is  likely 
to  exist,  which  can  possess  sufficient  authority  to 
disturb — even  if  it  were  to  desire  it — the  Constanti- 
nopolitan  Creed,  received  by  Universal  Christendom. 

Divided  as  they  are,  in  some  respects,  all  Catholic 
Churches  sit  down,  as  it  were,  in  peace  under  the 
shadow  of  the  trees  planted  in  General  Councils  by 
the  hands  of  Ancient  Christendom. 

2.  The  Council  of  Constantinople,  which  is  the 
Second  General  Council  of  the  Church,  was  not  sum- 
moned by  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  but  by  the  Emperor 
Theodosius.  And  not  only  was  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
not  present  at  it,  but  no  representative  of  the  Roman 
See  was  there.^  Therefore  it  is  not  true  (as  Roman 
divines  affirm)  that  the  Councils  of  the  Universal 
Church  are  dependent  on  the  Bishop  of  Rome. 

3.  The  Catholic  Church  of  Christ  on  earth  is  the 
divinely-appointed  Guardian  and  Teacher  of  all 
heavenly  Truth  ;  the  Recipient  and  Dispenser  of  all 
spiritual  Grace,  for  the  healing  of  all  moral  evil,  and 
for  the  diffusion  of  all  good,  by  the  sanctification  of 
Humanity  created  anew  in  Christy  the  Son  of  God, 
and  by  the  indwelling  of  God  the  Holy  Ghost.  It  is 
the  School  of  all  Christian  virtue,  training  men  by 
the  discipline  of  severe  struggles  on  earth,   for  the 

^  See  Hefele,  Concilien,  ii.  pp.  3,  4. 


344    Church  History.    Constantinople,  which  had  been  the 

seat  of  heresy,  became  the  fortress  of  Faith. 
glory  of  the  Church  triumphant  in  heaven.    Here  the 
Bride  must  suffer,  like  the  Bridegroom.     She  shines 
as  a  Lily;    but  a  "  Lily  among  thorns  '^  (Cant.  ii.  2). 

The  history  of  the  Christian  Church  is  the  record  of 
a  continual  conflict  of  the  Powers  of  Evil  against  her, 
and  against  her  Divine  Lord.  It  shows  how,  for  men's 
probation  in  this  world,  by  the  trial  of  their  faith, 
hope  and  love,  and  for  the  glory  of  God,  her  Spiritual 
Enemy  is  permitted  to  put  forth  his  power  and 
subtlety  against  her  ;  and  how  he  is  checked  in  his 
course  by  Christ,  working  by  means  of  faithful  men 
in  the  Church,  for  the  glory  of  God,  and  for  the  sal- 
vation of  souls,  and  for  their  own  everlasting  reward. 

So  it  was  before  the  Council  of  Constantinople. 
The  Divine  Head  of  the  Church,  watching  over  her, 
so  ordered  her  affairs,  that  when  her  condition  seemed 
desperate,  then,  under  His  merciful  guidance  and 
powerful  protection,  she  was  enabled  to  achieve  her 
noblest  victory,  and  to  establish  for  ever  the  true 
Faith  in  His  Eternal  Godhead,  and  perfect  Manhood, 
and  in  the  Divinity  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  in  the 
doctrine  of  the  Ever-blessed  Undivided  Trinity. 
"  When  the  Enemy  came  in  as  a  flood,  the  Lord  lifted 
up  His  standard  against  him.'^  ^ 

4.  It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  the  doctrine  of  the 
Godhead  of  the  Son  was  confirmed  by  the  Church  in 
that  City,  Constantinople,  where  Arianism,  which 
denied  that  doctrine,  had  been  dominant  for  forty 
years.  And  it  is  also  observable  that  the  doctrine  of 
the  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghost  was  established  in 
that  same  City,  where  the  Author  of  the  heresy  which 
denied  that  doctrine,  and  which  derived  its  name 
from  him — Macedonius — had  held  the  chief  spiritual 

"  Isa.  lix.  19. 


Inferences  from  the  history  between  Niccea  and  Constan-    345 

tinople —  God's  strength  perfected  in  viands  weakftess. 
place  as  Bishop  of  that  See.  It  would  seem  as  if  the 
two  Divine  Persons  of  the  Blessed  Trinity — God  the 
Son,  and  God  the  Holy  Ghost — had  been  specially 
present  in  the  Council  of  Constantinople,  which  vin- 
dicated and  confirmed  the  Godhead  of  Both  ;  and 
which  declared  those  doctrines  in  the  Creed,  which  was 
then  promulgated  to  the  world,  and  which  has  been 
preserved  in  the  Universal  Church  to  this  day. 

5.  Since  the  Council  of  Nicaea  in  A.D.  325,  to  the 
Council  of  Constantinople  in  A.D.  381 — a  period  of  fifty- 
six  years — the  life  of  the  Church  had  been  a  continual 
struggle.  Scarcely  at  any  time  in  that  period  were 
those  doctrines  not  in  jeopardy.  In  the  latter  days 
of  Constantine,  and  during  the  reigns  of  Constantius, 
of  Julian,  and  of  Valens,  the  champions  of  the  True 
Faith  were  contending  against  her  enemies,  who  were 
armed  with  the  imperial  power  of  the  Roman 
World. 

At  the  accession  of  Theodosius  some  hopes  of  peace 
dawned  upon  her,  but  these  hopes  seemed  to  be  soon 
blighted.  As  if  to  show  that  her  trust  is  not  to  be  placed 
on  Man,  but  on  her  Divine  Head  alone ;  and  that  in 
working  out  His  own  purposes  for  His  own  glory 
and  worship,  and  for  the  good  of  His  Church,  He  can 
dispense  with  all  human  instruments,  some  of  her 
most  effectual  helps  were  then  withdrawn  from  her. 
Athanasius  had  passed  away.  The  noble  Confessor 
of  Caesarea,  S.  Basil,  the  greatest  Bishop  of  Christen- 
dom after  Athanasius,  had  just  been  removed  by 
death.  His  dear  friend,  "the  Theologian,"  as  he 
was  called,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  was  invited  to  Con- 
stantinople, and  obeyed  the  summons,  and  he  was 
raised  to  the  Primacy  there.  But  he  fell  from  that 
high  eminence  as  rapidly  as  he  had  been  raised  to  it ; 
and  thus   it  was  shown  that  God  needs  not  man's 


34^5         Injere^ices  from  the  history  of  the  Council  of 

Constantijwple. 
eloquence  nor  learning.  The  saintly  President  of  the 
Council^  Meletius  Bishop  of  Antioch,  the  father  of 
the  Council  as  he  was  termed,  the  man  of  all  others 
in  Christendom  who  seemed  to  be  pointed  out  as  the 
Angel  of  peace  to  the  Churches,  he  also  was  suddenly 
removed,  not  by  resignation,  but  by  death  ;  and  a 
person  whose  name  excited  nothing  but  astonish- 
ment when  he  was  first  mentioned  as  a  successor  of 
Gregory  Nazianzen  in  the  See  of  Constantinople, 
Nectarius,  a  senator,  who,  when  chosen,  had  not  been 
baptized,  was  placed  in  that  Archbishopric,  and 
became  the  President  of  the  Synod  of  the  Church 
which  was  to  establish  its  doctrine  and  discipline, 
and  to  restore  its  internal  peace. 

In  addition  to  this,  the  personal  infirmities  and 
defects  of  temper,  charity,  learning,  and  wisdom  in 
many  of  the  Bishops  of  the  Council,  which  are  so 
graphically  portrayed  by  Gregory  Nazianzen  in  his 
autobiographical  poem,^  and  which  are  chronicled  by 
our  English  Historian  ®  with  disdainful  scorn,  as  dis- 
qualifying them  for  Synodical  deliberations,  were  in 
fact  evidences  of  the  existence  and  working  of  a 
Higher  Power,  triumphing  over  human  weakness, 
and  manifesting  its  strength  thereby.  The  greatness 
of  the  work  done  in  the  Council  of  Constantinople, 
and  the  power,  wisdom,  and  love  of  the  Divine  Agent 
in  its  execution,  were  made  more  conspicuous  even 
by  the  frailties  of  the  instruments  employed  in  it, 
and  are  more  entitled  to  gratitude  and  admiration 
on  that  account.  Not  by  human  aid,  but  by  the 
might  of  the  Eternal  Son  of  God,  and  by  the  grace 
of  God  the  Holy  Ghost,  Whose  presence  and  guidance 

*  xi.  1680  ;  cp.  xii,  154. 

^  Gibbon,  chap,  xxvii.  vol.  v.  pp.  27 — 29,  ed.  1802. 


Conclusion.  347 

were  promised  by  Christ  to  His  Church,  the  Council 
of  Constantinople  did,  what  it  was  designed  to  do 
when  convened  by  the  Emperor  Theodosius. 

The  storm  was  now  past.  The  Vessel  of  the 
Church,  piloted  by  her  divine  Lord,  passed  from 
that  troubled  sea,  on  which  she  had  been  tossed  for 
more  than  half  a  century,  and  glided  peaceably  into 
the  harbour  of  the  true  Faith  which  has  been 
undisturbed  for  fifteen  hundred  years. 

The  past  is  a  pledge  of  the  future.  In  every  age 
of  the  Church,  when  the  night  is  dark,  and  the  winds 
and  waves  are  high,  and  the  Apostolic  Ship  may 
seem  to  be  foundering  in  the  deep,  His  Presence 
is  with  her.  Especially  in  these  latter  days, 
when  the  fiercest  tempest  may  be  expected  to  rage 
against  her,  the  eye  of  Faith,  mindful  of  the  past, 
and  hopeful  for  the  future,  will  see  His  bright 
Form — made  more  bright  by  the  contrast  with  the 
thick  gloom  around — walking  on  the  waves  in  the 
dark  night,  and  treading  on  the  foaming  billows  of 
human  pride  and  worldly  presumption,  and  on  the 
surge  of  lawlessness  and  unbelief,  and  making  it  a 
pavement  for  His  feet,  and  coming  near  to  the  ship, 
and  cheering  with  His  divine  voice  those  who,  in 
obedience  to  His  commands  and  relying  on  His  pro- 
mises, are  there  toiling  in  the  storm.  And  at  length, 
in  the  last^  watch  of  the  night.  He  will  still  the  tempest, 
so  that  there  will  be  a  great  calm,  and  will  bring 
them  in  safety  to  the  land  of  everlasting  life,  "  where 
they  would  be." 

*  Matt.  xiv.  24—27.     John  vi.  18 — 22. 


LONDON : 
GILBERT  AND   RIVINGTON,    LIMITED, 
ST.   JOHN'S  SQUARE. 


THE     HOLY     BIBLE, 

With  Introductions  and  Notes  by 
CHRISTOPHER  WORDSWORTH,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Lincoln. 

THE   OLD   TESTAMENT, 

In  the  Authorized  Version,  with  Introductions,  Notes,  and  Index. 


In  Parts. 
f  ART  £  s.  d. 

I.  Genesis  and  Exodus      .     o  14    o 
II.  Leviticus,        Numbers, 

Deuteronomy     .         .     o  12    o 

III.  Joshua,  Judges,  Ruth  .090 

IV.  Books  of  Samuel   .         .070 
V.  Kings,  Chronicles,  Ezra, 

Nehemiah,  Esther    .    o  15    o 
VI.   Book  of  Job  .        .        .070 
VII.  Psalms  .        .         .         .     o  II     o 
VIII.  Proverbs,    Ecclesiastes, 

Song  of  Solomon       .090 
IX.  Isaiah     .        .         .         .     o  10    o 
X.  Jeremiah,         Lamenta- 
tions, Ezekiel    .        .    o  16    o 
XI.  Daniel    .         .         .         .050 
XII.  Minor  Prophets      .         .090 
Index      .        .        .        .020 


In  Volumes. 

VOL. 

I.  The  Pentateuch 

£,    s.d. 

150 

II.  Joshua  to  Samuel    . 

0  15     0 

III.  Kings  to  Esther 

0  15    0 

IV.  Job  to  Song  of  Solomon 

I     3    0 

V.  Isaiah  to  Ezekiel       . 

I    S    0 

£6    6 


VI.  Daniel,  Minor   Prophets, 

an    Index    .        .        .     o  15    o 


;{;6    o    o 


THE   GREEK    TESTAMENT, 

With  Introductions,  Notes,  and  Index. 

In  Parts.  In  Volumes. 

VOL.  £   s.  d, 

I.  Gospels  and  Acts  of  the 

Apostles       .        .        .130 

II.   Epistles,  Apocalypse,  and 

Index   .        ,        .        .     I  17    o 


PART 

£  s.d. 

I.  Gospels    . 

0  16    0 

II.  Acts  of  the  Apostles 

080 

III.  St.  Paul's  Epistles  . 

I     3    0 

IV.  General  Epistles,  Apoca 

lypse.  Index 

0  16    0 

£z  z  0 

£3    o 


Any  Part,  or  any  Volume  of  the  above,  may  be  had  separately, 

RIVINGTONS 

WATERLOO  PLACE,  LONDON 


MISCELLANIES, 

LITERARY   AND    RELIGIOUS. 
By  CHR.  WORDSWORTH,  D.D. 

BISHOP    OF    LINCOLN. 

Being  Selections  from   his   Works. 
3    Vols.     Price  365'. 


Contents!. 

Vol.  I. — Pompeian  Inscriptions — Athens  and  Attica — Notes  in 
Greece — Notes  in  France — Notes  at  Paris — Amiens  and  St.  Theudosia  : 
Story  of  her  Canonization — Notes  in  Italy,  and  at  Rome— The  Court 
of  Rome  and  Kingdom  of  Italy :  Its  ill-advised  policy  :  Offer  from 
a  Cardinal — Alexander  Lycurgus — Archbishop  Longley  :  Greek  and 
Latin  Translation  of  the  Letter  of  the  Lambeth  Conference,  1867 — 
The  Vatican  Council  :  Answer  to  Pius  IX— Whether  the  Babylon  of 
the  Apocalypse  is  the  Church  of  Rome— The  Old  Catholics  at  Cologne 
— Erasmus. 

Vol.  II. — On  the  Inspiration  and  On  the  Interpretation  of  the  Bible 
—The  Revision  of  the  Authorized  Version— The  New  Lectionaiy 
— Table  of  Proper  Psalms  and  Lessons— The  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
— The  Holy  Sacraments — Infant  Baptism — Holy  Communion — Non- 
communicating  Attendance  —  Confirmation  —  Confession — Ascension 
Day  and  Rogation  Days— Day  of  Intercession— Special  Forms  of 
Prayer:  Bishop  of  Truro— Church  Music— On  Hymns  ;  The  Holy 
Year,  &c. — Religious  Faith  and  Worship  in  Art — Cemeteries  ;  Crema- 
tion and  Burial— On  the  Intermediate  State  of  the  Soul. 

Vol.  III. — Religion  in  Science  :  Newtonian  System— Classical 
Studies;  Theocritus:  Horace:  Augustan  Legislation— "  Ethica  et 
Spiritualia"— Moral  and  Spiritual  Maxims— The  Spread  of  Infidelity 
— Destiny  and  Decline  of  Mohammedanism— Bishop  Sanderson- 
Ecclesiastical  Legislation  and  Jurisdiction  — Diocesan  Synods — Church 
Patronage  and  Simony — Clerical  Non-residence — Marriage  and  Divorce 
— Marriage  with  a  Deceased  Wife's  Sister — Clerical  Celibacy— Sister- 
hoods and  Vows— English  Cathedrals  :  Statutes  of  Lincoln  Cathedral 
— Mission  at  Lincoln,  1876— Pastoral  to  Wesleyan  Methodists— Burials 
Question — Labour  and  Capital — Capital  Punishment — Continuity  of 
the  Church  of  England  :  St.  Hugh,  Bishop  of  Lincoln— Welcome  to 
the  Church  of  America — Brasenose  and  Lincoln  Colleges  :  Letter  to 
Oxford  Commissioners — Greek  and  Latin  Translation  of  the  Letter  of 
the  Hundred  Bishops  at  the  Lambeth  Conference,  1878— Letter  to  tho 
Archbishop  of  Cyprus. 

RIVING TONS 

WATER  LO  O    PLACE,     LONDON 


fig  the  §mxL 


S.  HIPPOLYTUS  AND  THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME  IN 
THE  EARLIER  PART  OF  THE  THIRD  CENTURY.  New 
and  gi-eatly  enlarged  Edition.     Cr.  8vo.      "js.  6a. 

THEOCRITUS.  Codicum  Manuscriptorum  ope  recensitus. 
Editio  2da.     ys. 

THEOPHILUS    ANGLICANUS;    or,   on  the    Church 

Universal  and  the  Church  of  England.      loth  Edition.     2s.  6d. 

ETHIC  A  ET  SPIRITUALIA ;  Extracts  from  the  Fathers 

and  Others.     2nd  Edition,      is.  6d. 

THE  HOLY  YEAR— Original  Hymns.    5th  Edition,     is. 


RIVINGTONS 

WATERLOO    PLACE,    LONDON 


Date  Due 


^?;^pii^iPi^iiiw^^^^ 


BW935.W923V.2 
A  church  history 

Prmceton  Theolog.cal  Seminary-Speer^L.brary  _ 


1012  00075  8013 


^' ''mvtf-mf$^ 


}• 


1 


■m 


m-'"' 


1    i5W''i:!f!':fN^<>.i^;';^4j 


